Quizzes & Puzzles7 mins ago
So What Action Will Be Taken...
19 Answers
http://
shes fiddled millions by way of deception at the very least...why arent the police involved here ?
shes fiddled millions by way of deception at the very least...why arent the police involved here ?
Answers
1 to 19 of 19
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by bazwillrun. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
The Public Accounts Committee are not claiming she fiddled money. They haven't found any wrong doing.
The charity has been investigation by the Charities Commission, the National Audit Office (NAO) and PricewaterhouseCoopers UK, but so far they have not reported any criminal activity to the police.
Being fat, female, foreign and excessively colourful is not in itself illegal.
The charity has been investigation by the Charities Commission, the National Audit Office (NAO) and PricewaterhouseCoopers UK, but so far they have not reported any criminal activity to the police.
Being fat, female, foreign and excessively colourful is not in itself illegal.
The Public Accounts Committee was simply tasked with looking at the way that Government department's spent money. As Gromit states, they have not made any suggestion of criminality. Indeed, they've not looked into where the money went, as they were neither required nor empowered to do so. They were solely tasked with examining the decision-making processes adopted by ministers and civil servants:
http://
http://
/// There is an “obvious unfairness” in the way a group which for most of its life operated mainly in just two London boroughs was given around £4 million a year in Government grants, more than major national charities, the MPs added. ///
There lies the answer 'just two London boroughs' no wonder the communities were angry when Kid's company was shut down.
/// BBC Newsnight and BuzzFeed News have learned of a document, emailed to civil servants in the name of Alan Yentob, chair of the charity's trustees, on 2 June. It warned that a sudden closure of the charity would mean a "high risk of arson attacks on government
buildings". ///
/// The document also warned of a high risk of "looting" and "rioting", and cautioned that the "communities" served by Kids Company could "descend into
savagery". ///
http://
Not what some like to see, but please don't blame the messenger, after all it is neither the Daily Mail or yours truly, but the BBC no less.
There lies the answer 'just two London boroughs' no wonder the communities were angry when Kid's company was shut down.
/// BBC Newsnight and BuzzFeed News have learned of a document, emailed to civil servants in the name of Alan Yentob, chair of the charity's trustees, on 2 June. It warned that a sudden closure of the charity would mean a "high risk of arson attacks on government
buildings". ///
/// The document also warned of a high risk of "looting" and "rioting", and cautioned that the "communities" served by Kids Company could "descend into
savagery". ///
http://
Not what some like to see, but please don't blame the messenger, after all it is neither the Daily Mail or yours truly, but the BBC no less.
Tory Ministers, Oliver Letwin and Matthew Hancock authorised the final £3million payment to the Kids Company. 5 working days later it closed. Whether anything illegal occurred with the money, it was clearly very poor value for money and should not have received more taxpayer funding
Both should be sacked. In fact they should be banned from holding public office ever again. If they were in a local authority, they would have to pay back the money from their own pocket.
Both should be sacked. In fact they should be banned from holding public office ever again. If they were in a local authority, they would have to pay back the money from their own pocket.
yob,
Yep, I am a bit out of date there.
// Prior to 2000 in the United Kingdom a public servant, for example a local government officer, who had unlawfully spent public funds, or caused loss to a public authority through misconduct could be surcharged to recover public money. The surcharge was applied, after referral to a court by the Audit Commission. //
Councillors can theoretically still be sanctioned for the money back, but no one ever has been.
Yep, I am a bit out of date there.
// Prior to 2000 in the United Kingdom a public servant, for example a local government officer, who had unlawfully spent public funds, or caused loss to a public authority through misconduct could be surcharged to recover public money. The surcharge was applied, after referral to a court by the Audit Commission. //
Councillors can theoretically still be sanctioned for the money back, but no one ever has been.
"Kids Company would not have enjoyed the same “special” treatment if it had been based outside London, MPs suggest"
Very astute of the Honourable Members. And I would wager that it would similarly not have not enjoyed such "special treatment" even if it had been based where it was but was run by Mrs Ada Coggins instead of Ms. Batmanghelidjh.
Very astute of the Honourable Members. And I would wager that it would similarly not have not enjoyed such "special treatment" even if it had been based where it was but was run by Mrs Ada Coggins instead of Ms. Batmanghelidjh.
-- answer removed --
1 to 19 of 19
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|