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?

The worst thing about CIN is that they are doing that bloody #barefaced bollox again this year, complete with Boots trying to sell shit loads of skin care products so that you can be "brave" enough to leave the house without makeup on...cue red mist descending....

Well I am not sure if this makes me unreasonable, but just gone to pick up ds from nursery and was told he has to wear PJs on Friday and we donate a pound. Asked if this wearing PJs thing was optional and was looked at like dirt by nursery worker. Explained I only donate when it is my choice and ds will be showing up in normal clothes.

"There was a letter in our local paper recently saying that CIN have £90 million in their bank account that they havent given out."

I was going to say that. It certainly puts me off giving more, I must say.

YANBU. I have no idea how I am going to sort out 2 super hero costumes by Friday. Previously they have worn PJs which at least most people will have without spending time or money sorting it out.

I'm feeling stressed and anxious about life generally and school in particular at the moment (DD being assessed for SN due to behaviour at school, me due to start CBT). Being told with a weeks notice to come up with costumes is not helpful. I have been told we can make something. School is not expecting us to buy costumes. Well that's OK then.

I never watch or listen to the BBC on CiN day as it is so boring. Hate feeling bullying into contributing when I give monthly to NSPCC and the Red Cross.

Thanks all, you have restored my faith! And I'm so glad I'm not the only one. Like another poster, I have worked with children from families for whom £1 represents dinner tonight. I can not stand the way in which children are targeted by CIN and it's that which really bothers me. Plus it's God awful tv. And it's Terry bloody Wogan. Again. And Fearne sodding Cotton. Again. Plus dressing up. Again. And all that 'fun' to be had. Hate the whole thing. But mostly hate the fact that schools/nurseries/toddler groups etc are almost 'obliged' to join in. Twisted it most certainly is, IMHO. Think all the haters should join together and just refuse to be peer pressured into joining in....

The amount of misinformation and misunderstanding here about how charities work is COLOSSAL. Seriously, anyone ranting about a charity the size of CiN having £90m in reserves, or who objects to charity workers being paid a fair wage for the work they do, needs to go and do some basic research about charity in this country.

It is not only normal, but recommended, that a mid-large size charity has 3months-1year of operational costs in reserve. Any less will raise eyebrows amongst regulators and major donors alike. It's prudent and sensible.

Charity workers can't magic up the ability to do a full time job for no money. They have families to support and lives to live as much as anyone else.

although, all that said, i seriously dislike the mega auctions too. What's the point for 98% of listeners to even bother listening? Very, very annoying.

I always wondered why schools can't get children to make superhero badges in school time to wear, if they must do some activity related to this? And take up a penny collection?

[writes a 'Structural Causes of Poverty' book for foundation stage storytime]

What's the point for 98% of listeners to even bother listening? Very, very annoying That was my point to DH this morning while we had R2 on.

Ive not heard anything about it from my DCs school. Must remember to ask them in the morning. I did buy a raffle ticket a few weeks ago though.

Like a lot of people on this thread, Id much rather donate to small local charities of my choosing. I feel that being forced/coerced into giving money to a certain charity is not really charity, it's making a payment. Charity should be who you WANT to give to, not who someone else thinks you HAVE to give to.

Can't believe you lot "oooh, I can't afford it, so it's not fair" about the 'money can't buy' auctions. The fact is, they are done in the right spirit and raise millions every year and it doesn't bother me one bit that I couldn't afford to buy any of the packages in a million years. Oh and do you really think they would raise as much if they had it at £2 a text? - not a chance. Let's face it, if every person in this country gave a single quid, they would double what they usually made instantly, but that's never going to happen.

I know so many people and charities that have benefited. This thread is very depressing reading.

I don't know if it is different in other schools, but on CiN day at dd's and ds's schools, there is no forcing or coercion - if you want to give, you give. On dress up days where we haven't got a proper costume, we usually make something, or like pp said make a badge.

I and several others have said that we know of schools and groups who benefit greatly from Children In Need grants, which seems to be ignored on threads like these.

As far as the pay of the chief executives go, many of the chief executives of the big charities (including the Red Cross and Oxfam) earn around £100,000

The presenters may not get paid but staff in the building do. Stage door, runners, floor managers, cameras. I know, because I was one of them. Someone up thread saying 'everyone works for free' is totally false. (Though you may get people coming in on their day off to go to the paid for party.)

When it was at television centre (that the BBC leased) a studio cost around £50k a day to hire. Dressing rooms on top, more than one studio for more than one day. And that all comes out.

I've seen several celebrities knock back glass after glass of free champagne (on the charity) and yet reuse to sign a poster for auction.

It's a very expensive endeavour!

The charity doesn't pay for the show. That is part of BBC One budget.

Surely you know that if you were BBC staff Curious? That the charity doesn't pay?

The only part of that I said was on the charity was the party... Which it was.

I'm just a SAHM now, not BBC staff anymore. But yes, I know what I'm talking about.

Studios cost 50k and that all comes out. That's what you said - inferring it comes out of donated money, which it doesn't.

Adding fuel to the fire, whether through ignorance or bad phrasing.

Studios do cost that much, TC1 may even have cost slightly more due to its size, though I can't quite remember... And usually it would be the production company and not the channel that would be billed. I'm not interested in arguing about it, but I think we have quite different takes on it.

perhaps it's due to your ignorance?

Are you confusing Children in Need with Comic Relief?

CiN is in house (BBC paid and made). Comic Relief is made by a production company.

IMO you have think about the amounts of money we are discussing here. From their accounts it appears that in the 9 months to 30 June 2012 they spent ~£2million raising funds. Doubtless any costs towards he broadcast fall into that bracket. That seems mad, until you then read that through charitable donations (so the tv show, all the activities etc, plus legacies in wills etc etc) they made ~£50million.

Imagine an investment profitable enough that you spend £2 and get back £50. Pretty good going.

You have to spend money to make money. Without all the celebs, the naice party with champagne, and the tv show, they simply wouldn't make that amount of money. I'd rather they spend £2m and made £50m, than spend £0.5m and made a lot less.

If anyone wishes to look, they also have a breakdown of sizes and numbers of grants they paid to other charities and also some numbers about individual grants.

The stuff up thread about costumes sounds more a school problem than CIN. Our school used to have form for last-minute theme dressing up, but are much more flexible now (general dress down, dress down suggested colour etc).

And re staff getting paid - the people doing the behind the scenes TV work quite likely are not in a position to work for free. Free champers for celebrities is taking the p though.

In my town a large number of local charities which support disadvantaged children and families are folding, because their local authority grants are being cut as government shaves a third off councils' budgets. These are precisely the projects that CiN will not fund, as it does not do 'top up' funding for existing charities' running costs (e.g. salaries of the staff).

I think Comic Relief is the same.

So these charities scrabble around trying to devise 'new' schemes to attract CiN money, when their core work was perfectly good in the first place but is unfundable.

I'm listening to Chris Evans at the moment. I think the novelty of bidding is wearing off. Last year the lowest bid for the "dirty dozen" was £58,000 at the moment people with bids of £28,000 are "on the grid".........

Lottie, I'm with you on donating directly to local charities, then they can spend the money how they like, on what they know works.

i was listening to CE this morning and they had a car thingy trip - the currenty bid was 71k!! seventy-flaming-one-thousand-sodding pounds!!!