I may not be donating to Comic Relief this year.

I'm inclined to agree, jingle I didn't realise the percentage was as high as 40%. Children in Need raises millions so I'd rather the money went to children in Africa.

I will still donate though.

I agree with you both. Children In Need raises a huge amount of money for an excellent range of causes but there is an even bigger problem in the Thirld World and I always thought Comic Relief was started to address that.

It does seem rather a high percentage, but I suppose there are some people who wouldn't contribute unless some of it went to children in this country - they have to make it clear that it's not just overseas aid.

What a refreshingly different view point. I'm sick of hearing the opposite argument 'charity begins at home'. I will give, as I always do, but I agree that compared with the poverty and child mortality figures in third world countries our people don't know what deprivation really is.

j08 I agree totally that a comparatively wealthy country such as UK should be able to support the groups that Comic Relief contribute to in UK. However there are still people who only want to 'help their own' & not children and families in other parts of the world. I guess that is what makes CR feel they have to stress the UK based charities. I will still contribute though because in the end it's kids who benefit. The malaria charity is a good one to use as an alternative. Did you watch Mary & Martha?

Hi, surely it should not matter to where we give and to who as long as they need help. "Deprivation" means lacking adequate living conditions or education, I just feel we should help whoever needs our help and do not think it is begrudging money going anywhere. As long as it goes to really help somebody I do not care what country it goes to, as long as it does not line the pockets of corrupt governments or "helpers". Children can be hungry in this country and also have parents dying of Aids surely?

j08 Did you see that amazing film 'Mary and Martha' on Friday evening. Richard Curtis at his best. P.S. If you didn't and then watch it on catch-up, you will need plenty of tissues!

Ana that's the sad thing - that people will only give if some of it is going to their own kind.

jo8 Yes if that is why some people give it is sad, but surely we are all human beings and if you are being deprived of basic needs does it really matter where you live and it should be given out accordingly. I am not sure what is meant by "Their own kind". I think it is a shame that some people think that deprived children in the UK should not be given any help from this charity.

Children in this country have "Children in Need" in November. Comic Relief was started originally to help children in third world countries.

I repeat, no child in this country is as badly off as many African children.

By "their own kind" I mean people in this country.

I agree that poverty in this country bears little or no relation to poverty in Africa but surely the theme of the charity is Children in need not African children in need.

There are many children in this country who live in poverty and in terrible, sad circumstances through no fault of their own and I am glad that 40% of the money raised will stay in the UK although I am surprised the figure is not higher to be honest.

I'm talking about Comic Relief.

Charity begins at home. The planet is home to us all. Parochialism solved. (I wish!)

People, including Gransnetters, have plenty to say about children and young people who are in trouble with the law, members of gangs, taking drugs or simply not prepared to be part of society. The same people seem to be saying that money raised for charitable purposes to help children shouldn't be used for these ones.

Sorry j08 my mistake

I stick by the fact that it is not Comic relief for Africa though.

Course not, absent! Let 'em rot, the toerags! [sarc]

Better add a [woodenspoon] as well

I mentioned on the 'Mary and Martha' thread that I would prefer to donate to a malaria charity, so I have already done so.
I do not contribute to Children in Need either, since I heard of a local playgroup wondering how to spend their money received from CIN as they didn't really need anything. Why did they apply then? And now many other non-needy organisations also do so?
I prefer to give to smaller more specific charities such as Deki.

I'm simply trying to say this.

The BBC has two fund raisers a year. One, Children in Need, concentrates on needy children in this country. The other one, Comic Relief, was originally set up to help children in Africa.

The proportion of funds going away from Africa is now becoming larger, due to people believing that charity begins at home and, for them, as for most people, that means close to themselves physically.

I don't want to support that view. I am sad the organisers are giving in to it.

I never donate to Comic Relief or Children in Need. Big appeals like this tend to give money to photogenic charities that make donors feel smug and self satisfied and go 'aaah' when they hear where there money has gone.

My giving is targetted and focussed and I try to concentrate on charities that are less cuddly, less well known. less well funded and where I know in considerable detail what my money will be spent on. I am not adverse to money being spent on adminsitration. To be effective a charity must be well managed.

I don't care if giving to Comic Relief, Children in Need or, indeed, any other worthwhile charities makes people feel smug and self-satisfied. So what?

However, I too have "pet" charities which change over time but always include one children's charity, one animal charity and one mental health charity. I also try to pick the less glamourous and lower profile ones, e.g. a charity that provides support for the families, particularly the children, of drug addicts.

Good.

this is a good one

It doesn't make anyone feel smug or self-satisfied.