To be really irritated by Children in Need

[Timeforanap1]

Don't get me wrong, I have no problem with the concept of helping CIN. But it seems that it's schools which are targeted for the fund raising. Schools which include the very children the charity is trying to help. So schools are asked to hold special days and raise money, asking those very children and families who are in need to give money they don't have. Isn't this just twisted?

I'm confused about the super hero costume thing.

Are they particular costumes and part of the cost goes to CIN then? And that's the donation?

Or are parents buying (overpriced) costumes to send kids to school in super hero costumes and being asked to donate on top of that?

If it's the later - how bloody silly! Better surely to put the 12/15 quid for the costume in the bucket!?

I'm irrationally grumpy about sending DS to school dressed as a superhero. We don't have a costume, so I'll have to find time to buy him one that he doesn't need.

There are a handful of kids in his class living in B&B accommodation at the moment. I just know their parents will be spending money they can't afford on dressing up clothes so that their kids fit in.

It's the latter here fluffy, and totally agree with you. If I had the time I would have made a costume - as it is, I don't, so have just spent £12 on a Transformers costume for DS. It's a sort of onesie, so he will wear it again - but still, it really bugs me, esp. as it's only 3 weeks since our last dress down (up?) day

I'm guessing Damp Towel-man doesn't count as a real superhero?

I think its high time we had a big debate about CiN. The Daily Mail flagged up their reserves which as a previous poster said is in the public domain - you can look at their accounts - around £80 million in reserves.

Their excuse was that they pay 3 year grants - the way this works it that say you award charity A £30k a year for 3 years, that's £30k paid out and £60k waiting on deposit to go to Charity A. Now you have to times that by a few hundred, as obviously CiN gives a lot of grants, most of which will be more than one year, and of course, that happens every year.

But even if you put ALL those grants together, it doesn't come to £80 million. I have no objection to staff being paid, people in the voluntary sector need to earn a living, but CiN is not the answer to all evils, there are many thousands of charities that you can give to direct, and many grant makers that make a big difference. CiN just doesn't sit well with me, they seem to be a law unto themselves.

(PS Sorry should have explained - Daily Mail flagged it up to try to upset the apple cart, I know they were just BBC bashing, but on this occasion they seem to have come up with a good question)

I love the way these threads go. "I hate it because the presenters are paid" is stated by several people and then someone points out that isn't true. Then it was "The presenters don't get paid, Wogan did but he got outed so made a donation". That's not true either.

Wogan was for a great number of year's the BBC's number one presenter on TV and radio. Then just radio. He was on a contract that paid him an annual salary. In other words, a lump sum, negotiated by his agent every couple of years. He wasn't paid per episode but an annual salary based on a certain number of appearances/programmes. Children in Need was lumped in with it. Wogan was under the impression he had been doing it for nothing and as soon as he was "outed", he insisted that, each year, his salary was deducted by the equivalent fee an diverted directly to CIN. He no longer has that exclusive contract and is paid differently now and gives his services for free.

Are they particular costumes and part of the cost goes to CIN then? And that's the donation?

Or are parents buying (overpriced) costumes to send kids to school in super hero costumes and being asked to donate on top of that?

If it's the later - how bloody silly! Better surely to put the 12/15 quid for the costume in the bucket!?

It's the latter fluffyraggies and I entirely agree that it's ridiculous. I have made costumes for my two dcs (wonky hems and all ) but even they cost me £18 in fabric and materials. I get that they've been around forever and it must be more and more difficult to come up with a theme, but fgs choose something that the majority of people will stand a chance of doing from the wardrobe their dcs already have!

It's charity singles that really irritate me.

Between them, bono and his mates probably have enough to wipe out the national debt of most of the countries they're raising funds for and have enough left over to buy everyone an ice cream, but instead we're suposed to fork out 5 quid to listen to a collection of prats off X factor sing do they know it's christmas again - with a lovely slice of publicity thrown in.

ok, this will probably out me so those who realise who i am please keep it under your hat

every year I give up a day of my holiday so I can go and volunteer in Radio 2 for the all day radio request show. Off the people that answers the phones, we are all there for free and get paid nothing, not expenses or time. We do get free cakes and drinks provided by local business.

The local special needs nursery near me has recieved funding, i know children who have been at the nursery and that donation and funding have given them a much better start in life then if it wasn;t there.

Do I agree with things that money can't buy? No

Do I put my money where my mouth is and give up my time to answer the phone so normal, average income people can donate a few pounds and have a song on the radio? Yes

I object to all enforced giving by school children: anything that makes a child/ their parent HAVE to give to a charity is wrong IMO. This includes dress down day with a "suggested donation" - if the teacher is then holding out a pot collecting money as the children enter the classroom, it makes it pretty compulsary. I also object to it done to raise money for the school.

Quill. I hold fundraising dress up/down days and cake sales at the dd's school (not for CIN) I always re iterate that the donation is voluntary and children can dress in dressing up or own clothes. We collect money at the door, but there is no way a child would ever be made to feel bad for not donating or throwing 2p in the bucket.

Such a lot of wrong information on this thread. I used to work for them.

I especially like the post above stating that staff are well paid and have lots of perks. Love to know what they are.

Staple well paid is all relative, if you are on min wage and see a charity exec being paid £30,000 that is well paid (no idea what the real figures are)

I can see lots of sides to this debate but wanted to make a point about small, local charities. They are able to apply to CiN for grants to help them continue to exist and serve, often, a very specific need.

I am a trustee for a charity like this and we have been able to fund sessions for our children which means they and their parents benefit directly from CiN.

Wogan also does a great deal of behind the scenes and other quiet fundraising work for CiN throughout the year.

I'm pretty miffed at being told on Friday that DD requires a superhero costume for this Friday. 7 days notice.

There is also the request for a £1 donation. I feel like emailing the school and saying look, the £1 donation isn't a problem, but the money I have to spend, at short notice, on a blinkin superhero costume, to be worn precisely once, very much is. Pisses me off.

could you ask to borrow a costume off another mum, someone you know does have them (we have several as my son loves them). rather than buy brand new. our charity shops often have some in as well.

Oh yes, the £1 donation, plus the £12 Superhero costume (3 weeks after the WW1 costume I might add), plus the money for cakes, raffles and games = approx £15 for one child at Primary School alone. That's before the teens do anything at High School, DH and I stick in a couple of quid each at work, the Beavers and Scouts ask for money, and I get accosted on the street for a £1 in the tin.

There are other smaller charities which I would prefer to give to, but CiN has become this behemoth that no-one can say no to, it seems.

Saucy - no, can't really ask to borrow costumes as everyone is scrabbling about for one. I don't have time to trail round the charity shops as I work f/t in the middle of nowhere, and had a packed weekend with family commitments. We only got 7 days notice.

I've gone off them since I read the other week that they are sitting on tens of millions from last year. And presenters being paid is just about the last straw. I'll choose my own charity thank you. We are just being treated like a load of sheep. Let those celebs part with their millions instead of asking ordinary families scraping by to find extra money so their kids won't be ashamed in school. The more I think about it the more angry I'm getting. grrrrrr.

There was a letter in our local paper recently saying that CIN have £90 million in their bank account that they havent given out.
The special needs group that my ds2 used to attend spent ages three times filling in forms for a grant and were refused each time!
My Mum's best friend used to give to CIN every year until ds2 went away to a residential deaf school. She now gives money every year to the school instead of CIN as she knows where the money is going and what it will be spent on!!!

It pisses me off when the presenters fawn all over the stars "that have given up their time for CIN" when in actual fact they have just sung their new single and got a shit load of publicity and exposure! I think anyone performing on CIN should be banned from doing anything they are currently actively promoting. I could possibly stomach it then but I won't be watching them pimping their (desperate for Xmas number 1) new singles and being lauded for it. As pp poster said, a lot of these "stars" could afford to donate the whole amount raised. So why donate free advertising to them!?

No-one is forced to donate. I only ever donate to charity if it is my choice. If I feel I am being cajoled into giving money I refuse.