to think Camila Batmanghelidjh must be lying when she says she has done nothing wrong in her spending of Kid's Company Charity Funding?

[LuluJakey1]

She is like Jimmy Saville in that what she has been doing has been under all of all our noses and we have refused to speak up about it or believe it.

It is not just the luvvies who have been up close and personal with her- involved with the charity and CB at a very close level, some even Trustees. It is also the employees and the parents of children, the children themselves, the volunteers. We are not talking about a hidden mis-use of funding. We are talking aout a whole culture of open waste and self-indulgence.

I know it is from The Daily Mail but it is actually an interview with het.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3199527/My-heart-clear-says-Kids-Company-boss-Batmanghelidjh-admits-charity-paid-school-fees-employees-children-denies-wrongdoing.html

£5000 a month rent on an Art Deco House with private swimming pool - which houses a member of staff, and the swimming pool is used by CB but hot by any children- they are 'not allowed' (her words)

£40,000 chauffeur- now a specialist worker (according to CB). also has private school and therapist funding for his 2 children.

Staff( how many?) have their children sent to private schools because the job is stressful and it is part of a 'staff well-being package'

The Chauffeur's sister is also employed - now as a 'brilliant accountant', last summer as 'the woman who does my sewing' (mind you that would be a full-time job in itself, but it does imply the charity pays for those vile outfits much as I suspected)

25 young people given £769,000 a year funding - £31,000 a year each, to do nothing. They are CB's specially selected young people- many of whom have received funding for many years. She describes them as 'like a family, hanging round the house'. She deals with their funding herself.

Yet STILL CB complains staff should not have spoken up about any of this and implies those who have will suffer for it.

In my view this woman and her behaviours are corrupt, dishonest and immoral.

Are my views unreasonable? I feel this could be jus the tip of the iceberg in terms of what is yet to emerge and prosecutions will be very likely.

I think there should be a down- to the -bone, in-depth investigation of every aspect of the work of this charity and of CB. Not simply any concerns that have now been raised but a complete trawl of the spending, the practices and the behaviours of CB herself.

[BoboChic]

Sadly, I agree with every word of your post. I have long felt deeply uneasy about CB's colourful and unorthodox persona. As you say, the parallels with JS are all too close for comfort.

CB seems to be an incredibly dysfunctional person.

[OTheHugeManatee]

I don't think she's been dishonest so much as a posho who has absolutely no idea of the value of money or how to prioritise spending. I have to admit I was a bit at paying school fees for employees though.

[StrattersDairyProductPervert]

I disagree, I think she is very aware that all of the above are wrong, and well outside the remit of any charitable organisation.

Not liking the comparison with JS. But I am waiting for more to come out, it seems it was as corrupt as many other groups driven by a personality. :(

[StealthPolarBear]

I don't know much about this but it's all really interesting, and worrying. I do wonder whether what is known so far is jus the tip of the iceberg as uou say

[Mrsjayy]

We dont have KC in scotland so im not sure what it was set up for. She seems to have set herself up as some sort of saviour though its very odd the whole set up hand picked youngsters a closed set of staff its a bit culty

[Coffeemarkone]

I think she is a very dishonest, greedy and egotistical woman.

[StealthPolarBear]

"Groups driven by a personality."
Really good point. I assume there's research out there about organisations' leadership and how they fare.

[FarFromAnyRoad]

I agree with you OP. I think she was fully aware of her profligacy with charity money - indeed, may even have set it up for exactly this purpose. Pre Savile many things went unchallenged that wouldn't have a hope in hell of getting past us now and ok, this person was in no way a child abuser but she certainly traded on the luvvie connection for her own ends - no doubt about that.
I'm interested in the 'chosen ones' - wonder how that came about and to what extent they benefitted over others. The mind does boggle!

[AlbrechtDurer]

This is what happens when taxpayers' money is taken away from accountable local authorities etc. and given to rather less accountable charities on no other basis other than our (poor judge of character) Prime Minister being influenced by their charismatic, colourful figureheads. I suspect there will be a fair few more cases like this to come out in the next months and years.

[StealthPolarBear]

Yes but this isn't a bursary from what I read in the op. The staff who work for the charity had the fees paid for their OWN children

[AuntieStella]

Offering to support school fees, if an acknowledged aim of the charity and if anyone can apply for their assistance in that respect, is fine.

It didn't seem to feature as an available provision for this charity.

[MovingOnUpMovingOnOut]

Comparing her to a serial paedophile is not on. Regardless of what she has done with the cash she has not sexually abused anyone and the comparison is abhorrent and devalues any relevant and valid points you are making.

Shame on you.

[BabyGanoush]

The school fees are paid for staff's kids

I agree with OP (though not withJS comparison)

[Lagodiatitlan]

I do not see it in black and white terms. Whatever her personal foibles she established a charity which has done good things for many hard to reach young people, particularly in South London.
There have however been huge governance problems with the organisation, particularly as it has got bigger. No clear objectives set, no clear accounting - and this is why KC has failed, leaving many vulnerable young people in the lurch. As head of the organisation she has to take some responsibility for this. But so too do the trustees who have experience running large corporations and should have known better and intervened. So too do the politicians and celebrities who were dazzled by her larger than life persona. So too do the civil servants who kept feeding her public funds - though to give them their due, in this case, when they tried to pull the plug they were over ruled by the politicians. Group think!

[Mrsjayy]

It was staffs children not little joe from the housing estate who had school fees paid

[Lagodiatitlan]

Should also add that thee parallel with Jimmy Saville is extreme and unfair.

[LuluJakey1]

Why don't you like the comparison with JS? Both are someone who was:

A high profile public figure
Feted by luvvies
Rewarded for charity work with honours and public awards
Patently and obviously odd
Allowed free reign to do as they wish involving young people, working outside of rules and regulations and without scrutiny
Funded and fund-rased for by luvvies and the government
Had influence at high levels in government and society
Many people who knew what was going on did not speak up
Concerns raised about them were dismissed/ignored by those who should have listened
They were defended by said 'luvvies'
They continued to behave in the same ways and justify their behaviour as being 'all about children'
It all tumbled down and all kinds of disturbing things emerged

Many apt comparison points.

I don't think we have plumbed the depths of CB and her doings yet.

[BoskyCat]

It sounds very much like a guru-type situation where there is a cult of personality, the person in the middle controls the money and the people around them very closely, lives like a king and surrounds themselves with a few special "chosen" ones who will look up to them, in return for privileges. CB's woo-like beliefs also tie in with that kind of quasi-religious vibe.

If that's the case it's not new and has happened time and time again. Not that it's OK, certainly not in a charity with public funding, but it is a well-known phenomenon. I think comparisons with Jimmy Savile are relevant - not that anyone's saying she's done the exact same things, but that cult of personality thing where someone is allowed to get away with all sorts and the normal rules are brushed aside for them.

So I agree it needs to really be all investigated in detail.

[Finola1step]

I too fear that this is just the tip of the iceberg.

I have worked in the public sector for 20ish years. With vulnerable children and at times in the very geographical areas KC is supposed to operate in.

I can not name one individual or family who have been appropriately supported by KC. Not one.

To put it simply, the money was there, the money was spent but it did not reach the sheer number of vulnerable children CB claims to have not just helped, but saved.

[Coffeemarkone]

Lulu does have some very good points. Not that I am suggesting CB is a paedophile.

[Clutterbugsmum]

It seems odd to me that parents working for a children charity send their own children away, while they deal with other children less fortunate.

[Lagodiatitlan]

Jimmy Saville is a convicted serial sex abuser and rapist. CB is not.

[LuluJakey1]

Lago Shame on me? I think you mean shame on CB who has had £7.2 million if goverment funding between April 1st and August 1st this year nd there is none left and little to show for it.

Our school gets about £4000 a year to provide education for a child and we are accountable for every penny.

[BoskyCat]

Yes but it is a comparison, pointing out that there are some important similarities. Making a comparison is not the same as saying the two are exactly alike. It's saying there are some things about the two situations that are alike.

Also, we don't actually know what CB is or is not at this point. That's why it needs investigating.