“While women weep, as they do now, I’ll fight. While little children go hungry, as they do now, I’ll fight.” Or was he really thinking “One day we’ll have a big shiny headquarters amidst some of the world’s most expensive real estate”?
I saw this – the Salvation Army HQ – the other day when walking through the City of London. I don’t know why they don’t go the whole hog and get a big corporate yacht.
And I read today that the head of my old client Save the Children gets paid more than the Prime Minister. A few years ago I went to visit the HQ of a relatively small charity aimed at helping people in poor countries. They were doing themselves pretty well, too, in a palatial mansion set in glorious countryside. As far as I could make out they spent most of their time having pointless meetings.
They’re all at it, though.
The civil service big nobs have a dodgy deal with the Inland Revenue whereby they don’t even pay their own expenses. You and I do that for them. Isn’t it bad enough that they all end up with massive inflation-proofed pensions – and very often cushy numbers with the private firms they were allegedly monitoring?
Then we have the Bliar, coining it by the million after leaving us all in the s**t. We pay for his security when many of us would have him run over.
Mind you, things don’t work too badly compared to some places. Last week my dearest and I went to the Italian consulate to get her passport renewed. Normal waiting time, three months. They only work half a day there, and are unspeakably arrogant to their citizens.
No wonder there is a saying that Italians don’t travel – they emigrate
There are two sites on a Government campus in the regions. One holds sensitive public data and the other departmental back office data. So one contains records about you and me and the other payroll and purchasing for their own. Which one has the secure fingerprint turnstiles and catastrophic overspend on systems?
I currently advise on a government site in central London. Hard working people, modest accommodation and several losses worldwide through terrorism and military action. Every penny is observed wisely and staff work with pride, leaving to go home knowing they do good things.
Gig number 1 paid me more to try and make them “accountable” and “transparent” to their funders. Gig number 2 leaves a clear conscience for the same work, plus the local pubs are better. The arrogance of some departments is such that they don’t understand the “public” bit of their remit.
I was entertained when passing the Sally Army to see the receptionists sitting their in their beautiful area – next time I walk past I’ll check to see if there are turnstiles.
Come and have a coffee – you’re very welcome.
I’m afraid I don’t go into London very often, but thanks. Why not use the money for the coffee for something useful?
We do take the good stewardship of donated funds very seriously, and you may be interested to learn that our international headquarters has been on this site since 1881 – while William Booth was still General.
The current building was opened in 2004, and was financed by selling a long lease on the half of the plot that was surplus to requirements. In fact, the arrangement is such that the income continues to support the administrative work carried out from the building – which resources Salvation Army ministry in 126 countries worldwide.
In 1884 that was not a rich part of London. Now it is. Had the site been moved to somewhere cheaper, how much more money would there have been?
You really disappoint me Drayton. Why not judge the Salvation Army on what they achieve rather than where their offices are. When I was working with them in 1998 they were the second largest provider of social services in the UK after the Government, and you will see time and time again that their local churches are in places close to where the most needy people are. So what if their staff work in a nice building in central London – are we all supposed to wear sackcloth simply because we are trying to improve the lives of others? Watch this TED talk by Dan Pallotta and challenge your own views on the Third Sector. http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_pallotta_the_way_we_think_about_charity_is_dead_wrong.html
Sorry about that, Ann. I have watched Mr. Pallotta. I agree with many of the comments on his Ted talk, which are not complimentary. As one person points out, he appears to be saying charities should be more like corporations. Having worked for many of the world’s largest corporations and many charities I think that is a depressing prospect.
My former partner’s father back in the sixties ran the Salvation Army’s travel service. I have also worked for a great many charities, starting with Barnardo’s in 1977. My mother ran a charity. I hired the fundraising head of Save the Children for Ogilvy and Mather. I have lectured to many charities her and in Australia.
But of course, the views I express are mine, based on my experience and don’t have to be yours. I suspect the whole thing started to go wrong when someone devised the pretentious phrase Third Sector to make people feel more important. I have no doubt there are already Chief Donations Officers out there being overpaid and going to seminars.
Never mind the fancy property deal. It could have been done – and then the charity could have moved somewhere cheaper. Cheaper offices mean more money for good work. Many people do not give money to charities for one overwhelming reason. They aren’t sure where the money goes. That office tells them. Every time a potential donor walks past that office, money is lost.
It’s a shame you got my name wrong; I kind of lost you after that! I’m sure you were making lots of great points – but for me, the salutation has to be right. 😉
Best wishes
Anna
Sorry, I’m afraid I make mistakes from time to time. I fear I shall be sent to bed without cocoa.
Drayton provided a balanced response. We all love being acknowledged correctly. Here are a few spare ‘a’s for you, just in case anyone forgets in the future 😉
Drayton is correct. I walked past the HQ and vowed never to contribute to the SA again. Whether that proves my ignorance or not, that’s what the effect was on my willingness to give. I now give elsewhere.
Dear Drayton
Perhaps if you did your research properly instead of relying on an American video blog you would have the answer to your question.
However, could you explain how the charity would get cheaper offices please? They own the land and the building so there’s no rent to pay. The building of the offices was paid from through leasing the land next door as well as providing an ongoing source of income to run the offices. You may also not be aware that moving was considered and researched but for various reasons it was considered not to be the best option.
Incidentaly, my Father worked in the original headquarters building that William Booth purchased in 1881 and helped to salvage the little that could be saved following the devastating fire that destroyed the building during WW2 and then helped to set up the temporary headquarters in the training college in Denmark hill until a replacement building could be built.
Perhaps you should call in for that cup of coffee? It may help you to understand the facts better.
Best Wishes
Neville
What American video blog are you talking about, Neville? I have no idea.
My only interest is that I knew the former head of the Army’s travel service; indeed, he and his wife both spent their last few years in my house in Somerset.
The piece came about because I walked past there a year or so ago took a picture, then wrote about it.
The answer to your questions is laughably simple. In fact you are already doing half what you could do
Take the posh offices you are sitting on and lease them to some city vultures for an insanely high rent.
I’d love to see the “various reasons” that proved it wouldn’t pay to move to somewhere less expensive.
I bet they never mentioned that it was one of the most pleasant spots in the entire country; nor that if you are supposed to help the destitute you should live among them.
I absolutely agree with Dayton. I was shocked and disgusted when I walked by the head office. Salvation Army was the only place I donayed to , no more. They should be ashamed. The offices could be located anywhere and be just as efficient .disgusting
I was also shocked and surprised when I saw the shiny new Salvation Army building. If money from the selling of half the lease of the previous site helped pay for this one, it still seems to me the money could have been better spent. I see homeless people all the time in London. They need a new shelter! I have become increasingly wary and suspicious of “charities” and this Salvation Army headquarters does not decrease these suspicions; it increases them
Drayton
You are right Willam Booth always looked at ways to help people and I believe even if it required selling a building that was purchased long ago. He would be rolling in his grave if he saw what the salvation army was now it is no longer about the people but the business and feeling good about them selves and there reputation. Giving people food and sending them on their merry way does not help people they are back not long after for more. They should use this money to create jobs there is poverty because people have no income, poor education etc. Why not go one further and start an early intervention programme where kids are picked up before it is too late. The Salvation Army has become a brand it started with a call from God and is now a poorly run business.