Daryl's Blog

Recently I was booked in to go and meet the trustees of a charity based in the Midlands. A couple of days later the chair called me. All rather embarrassing. When he told the board what had been planned, they all told him they hadn't agreed to it at all, but thought he was just getting views. How often have people left a meeting you have taken part in, only to find out later that  there were different understandings of what they were there for? So here are some sensible guidelines to remember:

There are only three functional purposes for having a business meeting:

* To inform and bring people up to speed

* To seek input from people

* To ask for approval

Use this filter to determine why you are having the meeting and make sure that participants clearly understand the purpose of each agenda item. Clear understanding by all participants will lead to shorter better meetings.

Example: 'I want to bring you up to speed on items 1 and 2, get your input on item 3, and seek your approval regarding items 4 and 5'.

Thanks to Anthony Tjan for this helpful understanding. Now I need to go and incorporate this into my trustee governance notes - short section on charity board meetings is called for!

Do you have any helpful insights to share?

Have a good weekend. Daryl

If you go the the Charity Commission website and look up the details of a charity called TERI, you will find a tiny charity, that started well with around £60,000 income in its first 3 years, declining to £8,000 in the last year reported. (Actually exactly £8,000 which is a bit unusual and exactly £9,000 the previous year!) Of course this is below the threshold at which an independent examination is needed. (An argument here for reducing the threshold not increasing it!)

The reality is that the only trustee recorded is known as the 'top climate change official' in the world. The Telegraph did some digging and seem to think that the the charity has received over $300,000 from one source. It is getting substantial funds from 4 government departments. They found concrete evidence of £30,000 paid to TERI from DEFRA.  When challenged the charity secretary admits that there are anomalies in the accounts. I'll say!

This particular source was involved in the story that the Himalayan glaciers could vanish within 25 years. They have now apologised for this scare story (after accusing their detractors of using voodoo science)

The problem I have is that like so many of us I don't know if Global warming is true or not and I have to rely upon experts. But I need men of integrity, people who aren't on the take and concealing it. We need clear independent advice. This is all getting very grubby. I could say a lot more but I my colleagues worry about me getting sued.

I hope the Charity Commission will do the decent thing and not accept any weasel words. There's no excuse for concealing the truth in this way. And government can stop throwing money at so called experts who don't seem to know much more than the rest of us. I hope to God the next government will stand for truth and integrity.

Apart from Miranda, one of the highlights of recent television viewing was the programme on the Turin Shroud. I imagine most of us recall the ernest scientists who lined up a few years back to solemnly tell us that it was medieval. We who have faith somehow clung on remembering that faith is a matter of walking not seeing.

Now it turns out that these scientists managed to spectacularly screw up their carbon dating by carefully selecting a piece of cloth that had been repaired in the middle ages. Ray Rogers one of the original scientists set out to debunk what he saw as 'lunatic fringe' claims that the carbon dating was flawed, and ended up by saying that he was 'coming to the conclusion that it has a very good chance of being the piece of cloth used to bury the historic Jesus. The story is well told on www.shroudstory.com , and worth a read.

The moral is that you can't believe all that the scientists tell you, which is worrying when we consider the issue of global warming. They are so keen to get us to believe them (and give them lots of money to carry on their research)  that any evidence to the contrary is played down or at worst suppressed.

I wish you peace and joy in 2010. Carry the words found in Matthew 11.28-30 with you always.

I should have signed my last blog, 'yours sanctimoniously'! Resolution for 2010 - be kind to everyone you meet; if I can't perhaps I should try walking a mile in their shoes.

A couple of days ago we drove past a local garage; it had shut down overnight, quite without warning. Doesn't surprise me. When I moved here some years ago, I needed a local garage. I had a problem with my car which took them all of 3 minutes to fix. They billed me £50. I never went back. A garage half a mile away never charge me for those 3 minutes jobs. Result: they have earned tens of thousands from me,  my wife and the recommendations I give out. Why can't people learn the basic common sense lesson: if you want to grow your business take care of people and make friends.

Now, my next job is to advise a charity about making a tricky gift aid claim. Are they clients? No. Will they become clients? Who knows, but if I look after them they might, or they might pass our name onto someone else. Have a good Christmas and a good 2010. Sanctimoniously yours! Daryl   

A few weeks ago I heard that a church pastor was being investigated for possible benefit fraud. There was talk of him being on payroll and also in receipt of jobseekers' allowance. I recall hearing about another church which was paying off debt which the pastor had incurred, but not treating the payments as taxable earnings. Oh dear: there might be innocent explanations for all this, but it seems to me that if anyone must be above reproach it must be church ministers. Sadly, with a few notable and worthy exceptions, our MPs voted into Parliament to serve their constituents, set very low standards of probity and transparency, but that doesn't mean we should follow their examples.

Church trustees, where there are paid leaders, look after them properly so they can pay their bills. Leaders, if your church isn't able to pay you enough to live on you have 3 options: Get a job full or part time, write down a strategy to grow your church and then go and do it, and teach your flock consistently about the biblical principles of giving and finance generally. The next few years are going to be tough for most of us. This is a time when we need strong churches full of ordinary people being salt and light to struggling communities. Have a good Christmas and a good New Year.