Kids Club - Camilla Batmanghelijdjh

She's talking to John Humphreys now on R4

Saying child protection wasn't their remit and she wanted government and ministers to come and sort out the children pouring through their doors with multiple problems.

I switched on after reading janea's post but missed most of it unfortunately. Child protection is the remit of every one in society. If you set up a charity aimed at supporting vulnerable, excluded and disaffected young people, child protection has to be central as they're the very young people most at risk of sexual exploitation (to name one risk they live with daily)

I feel very uneasy about a charity that uses the money to pay the staff - this is NOT what it was meant for!

I think all charities have to have some salaried staff elayne.
The point John Humphreys made was that any prudent business or charity would have at least 3 months-worth of salaries stashed away as a contingency fund, so that employees could be paid.
At Kids Company there was nothing in the bank account and that's why the £3million bail out last week had to be used in part to pay staff salaries.

Call me cynical, but listening to Camilla b's emotional, volatile responses and her total lack of regret, I wouldn't put her in charge of a hen-house.

Elayne Of course they pay their staff. All child welfare charities have to employ qualified people. If you need counsellors and therapy session workers you do not get qualified staff for free.
A lot of this work is far too specialised to leave to amateurs.

The NSPPC helpline has sites in several parts of the UK they have to pay the people who monitor the phones and the qualified advisors.

I always felt uneasy about this charity and the CEO in particular.

I was a salaried worker for a national children's charity for a number of years. All staff were expected to attend Child Protection ad Vulnerable Adult training, no matter their role, and put their learning into practice. The children and families were the first priority, all actions were monitored and individuals accountable for both behaviour, standards and financial appropriateness. I have great concern for any charity - no matter the focus - that operates in any other way. Time and further exploration will tell if there was proven inappropriateness. I understand the organisation had a number of centres in the UK, perhaps not all ran the same way and there would have been many caring staff who are struggling with what is coming to light. I imagine it was a difficult environment to raise any concerns, not an excuse but perhaps helps understand how it got to the point that it did?

I too have been quite shocked by Camila's emotional responses janea. I understand that she will be very upset, but she is completely irrational and clearly doesn't accept that she has had any part to play in this. The more air time she is given, the more she is confirming where it all went wrong.

Did anyone else watch Victoria Derbyshire this morning? There were service users on there defending her and the organisation. Again, I could understand that they were upset but they clearly had no understanding of where things had gone wrong. Cash given to parents for 'the right trainers' so that a child would go to school. Taxis to and from the Christmas party 'because it's Christmas'. The parent who was speaking lost me completely when she said 'David Cameron is as bad as all these people that abuse children for what he's done to Kid's Company'. I may not be DC's biggest fan but that was outrageous.

Where were the auditors in all this? How could they just repeatedly hand out money in envelopes without recording how much and where it went?

I used to be on the committee of a smallish local charity, and their accounts had to audited every year and signed off. The auditors asked detailed questions about what happened to money raised by fundraisers and whether it was counted and signed for by two separate people, and spending and queried any regular payments that were not clearly accounted for. Our auditors stopped the payment of weekly taxi fares to a disabled volunteer, which they said were the equivalent of adding another paid worker.

Yes, charities have a core of paid workers. Volunteers come and go, and take their abilities with them, but permanent workers provide the continuity and specific skills. There are many roles which can only be done by those qualified and experienced in certain subjects.

The charity I volunteered with employed administrators and chartered physiotherapists, for example, but there were also volunteers who gave their experience part-time with other therapies, or with unskilled tasks, and students getting practical experience by volunteering in their free time. Relying on the volunteers totally would not have given the continuity of service and treatment needed.

I heard CB on Victoria Derbyshire this morning and as like so many on this thread I've had grave doubts about this organisation for several years (even though I no longer live or pay tax in the Uk). Despite this I was gob-smacked to hear a mum who was a KC supporter, having had a huge amount of help from them, state that when her son refused to go to school because he hadn't got the right brand of trainers KC gave her cash (!!!) to buy some, and at Christmas KC hired 3 venues (can't remember which ones they were but they were top notch London sites) for Christmas lunch.... and KC provided CABS to take them there, and one presumes , drive them and their Mums and Dads home again. What happened to mini-buses to pick up from designated stops?? It seems to me KC and the egotistical Camilla have been spending money like drunken sailors on a night in port. To the detriment of other charities I might add.

Yes, what exactly did this charity do for children. I would be very interested to know. Does anyone know?. And why exactly is it being closed down. Was there financial wrong doing, abuse. There doesn't seem to be a statement from anyone stating the reasons for the closure.

There's quite a good article by Harriet Sergeant in the DM (yes,I know the journalistic standard leaves a lot to be desired but this is worth reading). It sort of puts the whole debacle in perspective. The best/kindest thing one could say about KC is that they were incredibly naive. ....or maybe not, when you see the toytown figures being bandied about. Taken for fools, or something more disturbing?

Oh dear, is it absolutely necessary to sneer at the DM even while recommending an article printed in it?

Sorry ana, I read it online every day so I have the right to feel
like a social pariah according to the left-wing dept of this forum. . Why do you consistently feel the need to have a pop at me?? You don't even know me, so how come?

I agree, Ana. I'm amazed how many people apologise for mentioning articles in the DM when they've obviously read them.

I'm sorry, absentgrandma but I don't recall ever responding to one of your posts before, never mind consistently feeling the need to 'have a pop' at you.

As a free-lancer myself, sometimes the journalist integrity of DM writers leaves a lot to be desired. I was merely stating that Harriet Sergeant's article was, in my opinion, well written. . And no,I am not Harriet Sergeant.

I have just read the article Absent and agree it is a well balanced review of Kids Company. It would be interesting to hear from some of her ex staff.

I wonder what CB will do next, I can't imagine she will hide away. I can't find much about her background other than she went to Public School and is Iranian.

She might go down well in the USA.

Did anyone see Alan Yentob walking away and refusing to talk to journalists on TV? Apparently as chairman he had halted Newsnight enquiries into Kids Company. I have a certain amount of sympathy with CB we all know of charismatic people who are innovators but don't look at the day to day running, or practicalities, but Mr Yentob should certainly have known better.

pamelagoldbergblog.blogspot.co.uk/2015/08/charisma-passion-and-dedication-dont.html?m=1

Interesting blog explaining why charisma isn't enough.

Harriet Sergeant wrote both the Telegraph article and the Mail article and I think has written a book about KC.
That's not a pop at either Telegraph or Mail readers

While we're on the subject of taking a pop, why do so many people on GN find it necessary to have a pop at the USA at every opportunity?

Why do you think CB would go down well in the US exactly, Nankate?

Apparently, 163million pounds had been raised for this charity independently. From watching VD this morning Camilla was well thought of by her service users. It does seem that a lot of children have chaotic lives for many different reasons. Sometimes wonder where the responsibility should lie. Seems the Accounts were audited over the past years and no discrepancies brought to light.

It will be interesting to see how many of the showbiz personalities and politicians who've been keen to be photographed at Kids Company over the years come out in support of Camilla B.

I did hear Boris Johnson yesterday say that he's an admirer - so good for him for being loyal.

For those who say they've long had concerns about CB & KC would you care to elaborate why? Other than the recent allegations I've never heard rumblings or complaints over the past 20 years.