UK threatens to cut off aid cash to charities after Oxfam sex report

By William James

 

 People walk past an Oxfam store in Dalston in east London November 28, 2008. REUTERS/Simon Newman/Files 

 

LONDON (Reuters) - Britain will cut off aid funding from any organisation that does not comply with a new review into charities work overseas, aid minister Penny Mordaunt said on Sunday, describing reports of sexual exploitation in the sector as "utterly despicable".

 

Oxfam, one of Britain's biggest charities, on Friday condemned the behaviour of some former staff in Haiti after a newspaper report said aid workers had paid for sex while on a mission to help those affected by a 2010 earthquake.

 

Mordaunt said she would write to British charities working overseas demanding they declare any problems relating to the duty they have to protect their staff and the people they work with from harm and abuse - so-called 'safeguarding'.

 

She also wanted charities to ensure any historical concerns have been properly dealt with, and spell out their policies for handling such cases. She will meet with the charities regulator this week.

 

"With regard to Oxfam and any other organisation that has safeguarding issues, we expect them to cooperate fully with such authorities, and we will cease to fund any organisation that does not," Mordaunt said in a statement.

 

In a statement on Friday, Oxfam neither confirmed nor denied The Times newspaper report but said its misconduct findings had "related to offences including bullying, harassment, intimidation and failure to protect staff as well as sexual misconduct".

 

Reuters could not independently verify the allegations contained in The Times report and was unable to reach any of the Oxfam staff who worked in Haiti.

 

"ANGER AND SHAME"

 

Responding to Mordaunt's comments, Oxfam's Chair of Trustees Caroline Thomson said she shared the "anger and shame that behaviour like that highlighted in Haiti in 2011 happened in our organisation".

 

She said that as a direct result of the Times story, staff members had raised concerns about how employees in Haiti were vetted and recruited.

 

The charity said it was introducing a package of measures to strengthen its vetting and induction of staff, particularly in emergencies where it needed to recruit staff quickly. It said significant improvements had been made since 2011.

 

"Sexual abuse is a blight on society and Oxfam is not immune," Thomson said. "It is not sufficient to be appalled by the behaviour of our former staff - we must and will learn from it and use it as a spur to improvement."

 

Mordaunt, speaking to the BBC, said she would meet Oxfam representatives on Monday. Her department had not been told in 2011 about the nature of the events reported to have taken place in Haiti, although some details were disclosed to the charities regulator, she added.

 

"What is so disturbing about Oxfam is that when this was reported to them, they completely failed to do the right thing," she said.

 

"They let individuals who had undertaken criminal activity, they let them go, they did not tell prosecuting authorities, they did not tell their regulator, they did not tell their donors."

 

Mordaunt also said she suspected some people were trying to join charities in order to carry out "predatory activities".

 

"It is utterly despicable that sexual exploitation and abuse continues to exist in the aid sector," Mordaunt said in her overnight statement.

 

(Reporting by William James; Editing by Richard Balmforth and Gareth Jones)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2018-02-12

 

Long past time the UK government stopped giving money to so-called major charities.

All they are is money making machines for a handful of folk getting  over paid, big fat salaries.

Of every 100 pounds donated to most charities only about 5% ever finds its way to helping the people it was supposed to help.

I know of someone who has a Charity, who now has a very much better lifestyle, since they started it. Another person also connected with this same Charity, bought a property in France to live in.

 

This isn't hearsay.

We gave up giving to major charities years ago ,when we realized that most of the money just goes to the fat cats running them ,now we give only to local groups that help local people with all the people involved not paid

Incident management, they really should look at the big picture.

 

In all organisations things are happening that should not be happening.

Organised charity:  Poor people in rich countries giving money to rich people in poor countries.

I like oxfam and the work they do. There are many good people working for them. 

 

I think the current tory govt is a bunch of inept, lastminute.com idiots. 

 

Yet here I am, finding myself in 100% agreement with the tories and applauding their stance here. 

 

If the allegations about events in Chad, made elsewhere, are also true, doubly so. 

 

Strange days indeed. 

Edited February 12, 20188 yr by Bluespunk

2 hours ago, webfact said:

"They let individuals who had undertaken criminal activity, they let them go, they did not tell prosecuting authorities, they did not tell their regulator, they did not tell their donors."

I didn't know paying for sex in a foreign country was considered a 'criminal activity' in the UK.

Have I missed a new law?

1 hour ago, colinneil said:

Long past time the UK government stopped giving money to so-called major charities.

You forget charities allow the 'security forces' to move freely in problem countries.

They don't actually GIVE money, it's more buying freedom of movement.

5 minutes ago, MaeJoMTB said:

I didn't know paying for sex in a foreign country was considered a 'criminal activity' in the UK.

Have I missed a new law?

We're all off to the clink!!!

So many news headlines nowadays are no more than concocted outrage at humans displaying human nature.

 

Visiting a prostitute - consenting adults engaged in an economic transaction in their own time - is now not only 'criminal activity' but 'sexual abuse'? World's gone mad.

A bunch of male (presumably) employees go off during their free time and have sex with women (presumably) and pay them. For all I know, in those countries where this is supposed to have occurred, they may not have broken any law.

 

Their bosses in the UK are supposed to know all about this presumably as it happens. When they find out, the bosses get them to resign (probably because some legal advisor told them that doing otherwise could lead to libel and illegal dismissal cases) and they did not tell all their donors and put it in the newspapers because they would be concerned that this would affect donations.

 

This is despite the fact that no donations were ever used to pay the women concerned and the charity and everyone else was satisfied with the outcomes of the work that Oxfam had done.

 

But, says the British Government, we have to punish these charities, in fact punish every charity that we give any money or help to. But who do they actually punish? None other than the recipients/beneficiaries of the aid.

 

This is a bit like the guy who takes the kid, puts what looks like a gun to his head and says, "do what I say - otherwise the kid gets it."

 

So when you have gotten rid of Oxfam, how do you propose that wealthy countries respond to catastrophies? Will the government do it themselves? They don't have the skills, nor the structure. So the government is going to punish potential recipients of humanitarian aid by denying donations to a highly effective organization. They and the medial will undoubtedly raise so much noise and smoke that no corporate or private donor will ever give to them again. Now, you have also removed a highly efficient aid manager from the equation.

 

The issue that others have brought into the discussion about certain charities who spend all the money on inflated salaries etc, does not apply to Oxfam. For every £1 they receive in donations, they spend 82 pence on their humanitarian, development and campaigning work. They spend 8 pence on raising further funds and 10 pence on running costs, including all the accounting they have to do for donors etc. You can check their auditied accounts in their 2016/7 annual report online.

 

 

1 hour ago, Proboscis said:

A bunch of male (presumably) employees go off during their free time and have sex with women (presumably) and pay them. For all I know, in those countries where this is supposed to have occurred, they may not have broken any law.

 

Their bosses in the UK are supposed to know all about this presumably as it happens. When they find out, the bosses get them to resign (probably because some legal advisor told them that doing otherwise could lead to libel and illegal dismissal cases) and they did not tell all their donors and put it in the newspapers because they would be concerned that this would affect donations.

 

This is despite the fact that no donations were ever used to pay the women concerned and the charity and everyone else was satisfied with the outcomes of the work that Oxfam had done.

 

But, says the British Government, we have to punish these charities, in fact punish every charity that we give any money or help to. But who do they actually punish? None other than the recipients/beneficiaries of the aid.

 

This is a bit like the guy who takes the kid, puts what looks like a gun to his head and says, "do what I say - otherwise the kid gets it."

 

So when you have gotten rid of Oxfam, how do you propose that wealthy countries respond to catastrophies? Will the government do it themselves? They don't have the skills, nor the structure. So the government is going to punish potential recipients of humanitarian aid by denying donations to a highly effective organization. They and the medial will undoubtedly raise so much noise and smoke that no corporate or private donor will ever give to them again. Now, you have also removed a highly efficient aid manager from the equation.

 

The issue that others have brought into the discussion about certain charities who spend all the money on inflated salaries etc, does not apply to Oxfam. For every £1 they receive in donations, they spend 82 pence on their humanitarian, development and campaigning work. They spend 8 pence on raising further funds and 10 pence on running costs, including all the accounting they have to do for donors etc. You can check their auditied accounts in their 2016/7 annual report online.

 

 

What is the CEOs salary? pray tell.

Edited February 12, 20188 yr by colinneil

10 hours ago, MaeJoMTB said:

I didn't know paying for sex in a foreign country was considered a 'criminal activity' in the UK.

Have I missed a new law?

There is a British Travel Sex Law, but it seemingly is only about child sex.

1 hour ago, Proboscis said:

A bunch of male (presumably) employees go off during their free time and have sex with women (presumably) and pay them. For all I know, in those countries where this is supposed to have occurred, they may not have broken any law.

I always thought overseas charities were, in reality, free sex holidays for white women ........ with non-white native men.

Edited February 12, 20188 yr by MaeJoMTB

Not the only allegations concerning the sexual exploitation of those they were supposed to be helping under this man leadership. 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/feb/10/oxfam-faces-allegations-staff-paid-prostitutes-in-chad

 

I don’t know about the rules for oxfam, but, when I worked as a vso in Ghana, during our orientation week 3 guys went out on the last night, got hammered and brought back prostitutes to the orientation centre we were staying at. 

 

They were gone by the mornings end and flown home a few days later. 

 

Admittedly, they were very stupid as senior British Council officials were leading the orientation. 

 

Zero tolerance at that level. 

Edited February 12, 20188 yr by Bluespunk

5 hours ago, MaeJoMTB said:

I didn't know paying for sex in a foreign country was considered a 'criminal activity' in the UK.

Have I missed a new law?

LOL. If it involves paid sex it's a crime in the brave new Britain. They've given away the Empire for nothing back and now they are slowly vanishing up their nether parts in a long and painful journey to complete insignificance, obsessed with naughtiness above all else. Still, it looks good in the red top gutter press to the twittering class.

 

When I first heard the shrieking about sexual exploitation, I thought it was some huge scandal along the lines of the UN sex traffickers in Bosnia, but turns out it was just the boys paying prostitutes.

 

Prostitution is illegal in Haiti, but in the same way as it's illegal in Thailand.

49 minutes ago, colinneil said:

What is the CEOs salary? pray tell.

You could have googled that in the time it took you to write that on here. It's not a secret.

44 minutes ago, Gillyflower said:

There is a British Travel Sex Law, but it seemingly is only about child sex.

Give them time. They are probably, as I write this, wondering how to word a law banning British men from even looking at a woman overseas.

Way it's going men will be banned from travelling without some woman chaperoning him ( at his expense ).

 

Answer to all this silliness about Haiti is for Oxfam et al to only employ women as aid workers.

21 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

Not the only allegations concerning the sexual exploitation of those they were supposed to be helping under this man leadership. 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/feb/10/oxfam-faces-allegations-staff-paid-prostitutes-in-chad

 

I don’t know about the rules for oxfam, but, when I worked as a vso in Ghana, during our orientation week 3 guy’s went out on the last night, got hammered and bringing back prostitutes to the orientation centre we were staying at. 

 

They were gone by the mornings end and flown home a few days later. 

Silly guys bringing the pros back to a place of work. They must have been really thick. Any guy with sense knows to use a short time hotel or their rooms.

4 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Silly guys bringing the pros back to a place of work. They must have been really thick. Any guy with sense knows to use a short time hotel or their rooms.

To be fair, they probably didn’t realise they were prostitutes at the time, we’d only been in country 5 days and they were fairly young/naive. 

 

At the time, I had no idea what the score was, so I doubt they did. 

Edited February 12, 20188 yr by Bluespunk

1 minute ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Silly guys bringing the pros back to a place of work. They must have been really thick. Any guy with sense knows to use a short time hotel or their rooms.

 

What do you figure the majority of the donors would think about their donations being used to send guys around the world for cheap sex?  Cheap because of the very conditions and economic exploitation their activities are supposed to help stop.

 

Not the tiny minority who move to a SEA nation for cheap sex themselves (and post up here on TVF), I'm talking about the vast majority who don't.  Forget the legalities of it.  Behavior that puts the donations at risk should be banned.

 

1 minute ago, impulse said:

 

What do you figure the majority of the donors would think about their donations being used to send guys around the world for cheap sex?  Cheap because of the very conditions and economic exploitation their activities are supposed to help stop.

 

Not the tiny minority who move to a SEA nation for cheap sex themselves (and post up here on TVF), I'm talking about the vast majority who don't.  Forget the legalities of it.  Behavior that puts the donations at risk should be banned.

 

Far as I know the guys get paid and used their own money to pay for it. Perhaps the donors think that aid workers should do it for free. Oxfam isn't VSO.

None of this would have been known if some do gooder sticky beak hadn't made a big deal out of it.

If you think you can find men prepared to go to Haiti and not want a bit of fun, I think you will be disappointed.

8 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

To be fair, they probably didn’t realise they were prostitutes at the time, we’d only been in country 5 days and they were fairly young/naive. 

 

At the time, I had no idea what the score was, so I doubt they did. 

they were fairly young/naive. 

Then the blame lies at the VSO organisers feet. They should have explained that it wasn't on bringing pros back to the base.

Boys will be boys.

When I arrived in Singapore we were given a detailed explanation of the P4P situation there and what not to do to stay out of trouble.

13 minutes ago, impulse said:

What do you figure the majority of the donors would think about their donations being used to send guys around the world for cheap sex?  Cheap because of the very conditions and economic exploitation their activities are supposed to help stop.

Next they'll be banning 'male' charity workers from having a beer.

Edited February 12, 20188 yr by MaeJoMTB

2 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Still, it looks good in the red top gutter press to the twittering class.

Yes the gutter press like the Guardian and the Times!

 

Anyone travelling in S.E.A will have seen the charity's four wheel drive Toyotas parked outside bars and restaurants and the drunken Aid Workers legless and incapable. Especially Cambodia in my experience.  I have a very biased view of Aid Charity's across the board having seen so many p*ssing away the donators money and ill conceived ideas of what is best for the people they are supposed to be helping.  As for this case of so called sexual exploitation.... Well by the nature of the way charities work, in poor countries and areas of disaster then exploitation of all kinds in going to happen.  However there are many strands to this.  One reason why this hits a nerve is because Oxfam receive an enormous amount of government funding (tax payers money) along with money raised by their shops that are staffed by volunteers.  If that money, that pays for both the hotels and  living expenses of the on the ground workers, then gets  used on hooker parties it is going to upset many.  On the other hand Oxfam are one of many Aid Organisations that  misuse their funds and abuse their positions.  It goes with the territory.  When in Chiang Mai I helped out with a few local charities and everyone involved were absolutely brilliant.  I also knew people working for two larger charities who were very sincere although fairly naïve.

 

It is a fact that many of these organisations do exploit.  They exploit the good sincere people who work their socks off for them.  They exploit the donors by misusing the money given in donations.  And inevitably some will exploit the situation that the people they are there to help are in.

 

 

11 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

they were fairly young/naive. 

Then the blame lies at the VSO organisers feet. They should have explained that it wasn't on bringing pros back to the base.

Boys will be boys.

When I arrived in Singapore we were given a detailed explanation of the P4P situation there and what not to do to stay out of trouble.

A lot of our orientation was based around the traditional, conservative nature of Ghanaian society... I’m guessing they assumed we were all old enough to figure it out for ourselves. 

 

However, it was a pity they didn't mention the other, more realistic, side of it. 

 

In some ways like Thailand, in that the more conservative Thais have one view on society, that doesn’t always match the reality around them. 

 

I gather that a quiet word was had in future orientations by experienced volunteers.

Edited February 12, 20188 yr by Bluespunk

13 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Far as I know the guys get paid and used their own money to pay for it. Perhaps the donors think that aid workers should do it for free. Oxfam isn't VSO.

None of this would have been known if some do gooder sticky beak hadn't made a big deal out of it.

If you think you can find men prepared to go to Haiti and not want a bit of fun, I think you will be disappointed.

 

Yeah, you'd only have 90% of the male population of the UK to select from.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/11235794/One-in-10-British-men-have-paid-for-sex.html

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/relationships/why-are-so-many-young-men-paying-for-sex/

 

You may have a hard time weeding them out in advance, but you could certainly operate an NGO without whore mongers.  

 

6 minutes ago, dunroaming said:

Oxfam receive an enormous amount of government funding (tax payers money)

That's because it's a front for MI5.

8 minutes ago, impulse said:

Yeah, you'd only have 90% of the male population of the UK to select from.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/11235794/One-in-10-British-men-have-paid-for-sex.html

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/relationships/why-are-so-many-young-men-paying-for-sex/

 

You may have a hard time weeding them out in advance, but you could certainly operate an NGO without whore mongers.  

 

I think you'll find it's lack of opportunity that has restricted the 90%.

Until I came to Thailand, I had never paid (cash) for sex either.

Now I view it as entirely normal, as do all the Thais.