Just wondered what the general view was. My self am somewhat unimpressed with the way they have handled the original issue(s) but initial responce once it was in the news has been somewhat corporate. Am not to impressed with the Chairman on R4 interview other day, though the deputy director did the right thing. I think perhaps they have now got a new “disaster recovery” team in as advisers. Its a shame some great work.

Funny how something from 7 years ago suddenly is back in the news and the government threatening to cut funding shortly after Oxfam made a report criticising the government…

quick, 7 minutes left to proof read..

Just my 2c but I think charities suffer as they get bigger.

Typically most organisations become more reliant on process over individuals as they get bigger and internal competition to rise to the top gets tougher and nastier.

Charities start off at a disadvantage IMHO in that most people who get involved do so for the right reasons that have nothing to do with rising to the top.
This just makes it easier for the wrong types to get into positions of power.
The bigger the charity and the more budget it controls the more it attracts the wrong “professionals” with questionable morals.

I was sat in a traffic jam by an Oxfam today with this story on the news and on the shop front it had “empowering women”….it tickled my irony-meter.

It’s often said, and criticised for, but they do do an awful lot in deprived countries.

Whilst this story isn’t new, or even singled out towards them (because I’m sure this happens all over the world and not just for charity organisations) the way it’s been handled is the crucial point.

Once known of the issues they should have acted right there and then, as is sweeping under a blanket of corporate blindness has rightly brought the organisation into disrepute and the only ones to suffer will be the recipients of the charitable and needed aid, and that’s very sad.

I do however have a point of view on the President of the country who was interviewed on R4 this morning. Simply outlandishly criticising the organisation and having the airtime to have a pop at them for not doing enough to help with aid and the continued suffering his people are under.. well sorry sunbeam, do more for your people instead of driving around your capital with hordes of your croanies in swanky offices and homes and cars and no doubt (alleged) £bn’s stashed away in foreign accounts..creamed off no doubt from aid received and goods sold off to the highest bidder in corruption rings larger than Saturn..

Right, back to the work they do.. NGO’s do an incredible job in very stressful conditions for (in the main) nothing more than thier own moral backbone holding them up. I know someone who offers eye surgery sorties twice a year to remove cataracts and other eye infections, she is an eye surgeon who does this work for free.. and remains committed to the cause. We spoke the other night on this subject and her response was “this stuff happens all the time, I’m only surprised Oxfam have been caught out by it because they’re pretty good at silencing issues like this”

🙈🙉🙊

Wiggles nails it.

Sorry slimjim78. Comp school education n a dose of dislixia. I’ll try harder next time.

As for OXfam certainly agree that as a large ngo its got to get pretty unwieldy. BUt I get the impression from various media coverage (BBC, Indy), they lost their way on this issue. Perhaps the funding became more important than things that they knew were wrong. When you are stuck in the piles sh1t and destruction on the ground then things get cloudy. No excuse for those running the show int UK though.

Wiggles, do you not see withholding the truth of what had gone on a little short sighted. To some it comes across as a cover up. It’ll be a shame if people stop giving to charities due to this stuff.

Agree with you there bikebuoy.

Interestingly I was sat the a director of a small charity today and asked his opinion on it.

His view was that, given it happened 7 years ago there may well be a reason that it’s appeared back in the public domain. He wasn’t sure where the report originated from but suggested that this often happens when a damning report on either government or the press is due.

He is also of a similar view to stevextc that the bigger a charity gets the more difficult it is for it, both in terms of dealing with this kind of issue (hire more people, inevitably there’ll be more bad apples in the cart) and in terms of pay (see recent uproar on directors pay for some charities).

I think we’ll see a lot more scrutiny over charities in the coming months. After Savile and then Weinstein, The written press and now charities. Every aspect of public society corporate and personal is being pulled apart for immoral practices.
The allegations of people abused in the shops aside, the employees hiring ladies of the night…. so what? My employer doesn’t see fit to comment on what I chose to do with my cash out of work time and neither should it.

Straight outaa Compton. No.

Straight outaa The daily express.

Jekkyl, it might be possible to make the ‘it’s in their own time, so what’ argument back in the UK, just about. When you’re in a crisis-hit country the chances of you exploiting someone in the most desperate of circumstances is significantly higher, plus they allegedly did in an Oxfam-rented villa. Plus these staff members are responsible for the disbursement of resources, leading them wide open to blackmail and charges of demanding sex for aid.

So, probably the business of their employer to some degree…

Has there not been a person from the Times banging on about this for a while? Heard him on R4 giving it some about Haiti and the role of number of NGO’s, not just Oxfam, Red Cross (American) are those I recall. It seems loads of money was raised after the earthquake and major amounts of it are still in the bank while people are still living in squalor.

He is also of a similar view to stevextc that the bigger a charity gets the more difficult it is for it, both in terms of dealing with this kind of issue (hire more people, inevitably there’ll be more bad apples in the cart) and in terms of pay (see recent uproar on directors pay for some charities).

Just being clear, I don’t mean a higher percentage of bad apples .. 99% of the volunteers etc. do so with nothing but an altruistic motive (and perhaps company :D)

The problem I see is that because most people inside are doing it for altruistic reasons it makes it easier for the bad apples to exploit this and rise to positions of power.

In many way’s it’s not dissimilar to the scandals around BC and Olympic cycling

I also agree however that there is often an agenda for leaking this sort of news.

Another aspect for NGO’s is bribery and corruption.
A company may have policies… if bribes are expected they can choose to not do business. A charity like Oxfam … most of the people they are trying to help need help because of the corrupt regimes.

I remember in the Tsunami relief SOME governments were charging charities to land aid and vehicles to distribute it and preventing them distributing aid until the right palms were greased.

“Funny how something from 7 years ago suddenly is back in the news and the government threatening to cut funding shortly after Oxfam made a report criticising the government…”

^This.

I work for an NGO that was one of several named by one Priti Patel who alluded (without proof) that an employees of a said aid relief organisations may have taken advantage of underage girls. To say that people are both upset and anticipating a mild reduction in overseas aid is an understatement.

While what happened in Haiti is absolutely appalling and is a wake up call for the charity sector, there is an awful lot of political capital being made out of it to suit the agenda of those on the far right of government who wish to slash the overseas aid budget.

Well if you don’t want the far right to have a go then get your house in order. There will be loads to push them back with only a brief glance.

Hati has long been destination for sex tourism in the area. I used to work in The Bahamian capital Nassau and it was common for expats ect to have sex junkets to Hati, there’s never been a shortage of prostitutes there, and I’m sure the income they brought in was valuable to their family.
I’d be outraged by the Oxfam scandal if….
1. The girls were under age.
2. Money destined for aid programs (not the workers personal monies) was used.
3. There was any coercion involved by the aid workers.
4. Local laws were broken.
I’m not generally bothered by men working away from home using prostitutes. Maybe I’ve missed some detail in this story.

The allegation is that at least some of the prostitutes in Haiti were underage. Even if they weren’t, it depends if you see the sex tourism industry in parts of the Caribbean as a positive development for women’s rights in the region.

Oxfam has spent years voicing support for empowerment of women in developing countries, so I can see why it might not chime with its values.

In not saying I endorse what they did just that seems strange timing how it is being used now… Also unless shagging prostitute’s was part of their mission briefing it’s not really an organisation problem. If you got caught doing that on your business trip would it be you or your boss in trouble?

If the head of an organisation is responsible for personal indiscretions of staff Teresa may has a lot to answer for…

“Also unless shagging prostitute’s was part of their mission briefing it’s not really an organisation problem. If you got caught doing that on your business trip would it be you or your boss in trouble?”

Covering it up is, though. Letting the person leave quietly so that they can go off to another organisation and carry on is all very Catholic…

It’s two wrongs though imo. It’s so obviously political that it hurts, and whereas on the one hand you’ve got the limbs doing it and the centre just failing to act, on the government’s part it’s cynical and cold plotting of how to inflict damage on a charity that does a lot of good. I don’t even really get why- there’s other ways to drive cuts in foreign aid, and bigger slices of the pie to cut.

I wonder if it’s as simple as the old saw about people just not liking to see anyone else be better than they are. Those charities are all in it for themselves, right?

Yeah obviously covering it up isn’t good but again any business (big charity=business) would try to keep this thing out of the public domain. Equally they do a huge amount of good so it would be insane to try and destroy an entire charity based in the shady actions of a few people there is no proof of some company wide conspiracy

Daily mail headlines talking about people being offered sex for aid in their shops apparently as well now…

Again funny all the sudden interest and the mail (who obviously always stand up for abuse victims…) Jumping in so heartily just after the report titles something like “the economy for the 99%” or whatever it was Oxfam published.

“Also unless shagging prostitute’s was part of their mission briefing it’s not really an organisation problem. If you got caught doing that on your business trip would it be you or your boss in trouble?”

I’ll accept Oxfam being a special case. I’m sure they’ve run programs that actively help women lead lives away from prostitution, so I can see how it wouldn’t sit right.
But do normal buisness have a no paying for sex policy. Providing it was in a person’s spare time, their own money and no laws were broken. I’ve never heard of such a thing, but then I’m massively out of touch with the modern work place.

But do normal buisness have a no paying for sex policy. Providing it was in a person’s spare time, their own money and no laws were broken. I’ve never heard of such a thing, but then I’m massively out of touch with the modern work place.

While not by any means the same sort of thing, in the States businesses make it their concern if employees drink, even in their own time in the evening and weekends, so I see no real stretch for a responsible charity, working with extremely vulnerable people, making such behaviour absolutely verboten!

Trading aid for sex is one of the central allegations. Way beyond just using prostitutes. Allowing people to resign and thus paying them another month or more is not acceptable. It is a matter for Government as Oxfam is given £32m per anum orf taxpayers money.

As an aside the whole Haiti earthquake assistance episode is mired in controversy with the Clinton Foundation too.

>Funny how something from 7 years ago suddenly is back in the news and the government threatening to cut funding shortly after Oxfam made a report criticising the government…

I wasn’t aware of this….

https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2018/feb/13/aid-worker-haiti-quake-debauchery-shocking

Itsnot just the right wing press though, this guardian article seems completely devoid of facts

“Yeah obviously covering it up isn’t good but again any business (big charity=business) would try to keep this thing out of the public domain.”

FWIW, no. I’ve just been personally involved in dealing with some Shenanigans and we took it straight to the authorities. Truth tends to come out, coverups are how to make it worse (and, if you have actual enemies, like bizarrely the UK government in this case, you also hand the timing to them on a plate too so they can bring it up when it’s convenient in several years time)

They’ll be looking into what squaddies get up to overseas next!

(My brother has some shocking stories from his navy days & maintains the soldiers were much worse)

Or indeed business meetings in Singapore etc

Good to see that Oxfam are taking this seriously tho as it’s something that really has no place in the aid sector

Meanwhile in Bolton, some old ladies behind the counter in Oxfam surprisingly have little knowledge of things that happened 7 years ago, & 7000 miles away

http://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/news/15989143.We_tried_to_talk_to_Oxfam_staff_about_the_Haiti_prostitutes_scandal___but_they_ve_been_told_not_to_say_anything/?ref=mr&lp=4

<h1 class=”headline semi-loud” style=”box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 0.5rem; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-weight: 500; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 29px; font-family: ‘Fira Sans’, sans-serif; font-size: 24px; color: #212529; background-color: #f5f5f5;”>We tried to talk to Oxfam staff about the Haiti prostitutes scandal…but they’ve been told not to say anything</h1>

“Trading aid for sex is one of the central allegations.”

If this was proved, and Oxfam did cover it up, they deserve every bit of criticism and more. But there’s definitely a sense of politics about the whole thing. 🙁

I struggle with the Daily Mail allegations. I mean we all know the demographic of the typical Oxfam shop worker. My granny was one for years.

The director of Oxfam’s operations in Haiti has resigned amid an inquiry into allegations of misconduct by staff.</p>

Perhaps the BBC need to ask themselves why they didn’t investigate further after their report back in 2011?

Fearless investigative reporting from the Bolton News there.

Hope they grilled the local cinema ushers about Harvey Weinstein’s antics too.