Harry resigns from Sentebale, the charity he founded!

[AtIusvue]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14536443/prince-Harry-resigns-charity-cofounder-leadership-row.html

or

The Times

https://archive.ph/GWUac

Are you culturally appropriating?
Cross post.

It is a very old fashioned and not very effective way to fundraise. Great for the egos of those involved, but very inefficient compared to creating well thought through programmes with measurable results, and accessing grants and major donors (people who will give significant amounts because you achieve results, not relatively small amounts to play polo).

And although Lesotho is poor, it is part of SADC which has some very wealthy parts and people who want to invest in the region.

It is well known that for many millionaires and billionaires their charities are a vehicle for them to enjoy their money and influence, whilst looking philanthropic and not paying tax.

Harry and Megan are just not as bright as the others who are doing it

I have long struggled with the idea that rich white men flying themselves and horses around in private jets to play polo is somehow a noble generous effort to change the disparity of the world.

Her not being fired does not necessarily mean that she is vindicated. What it means is that they are not allowed to fire her in the way that they wish.

I am usually on the side of women (especially women of colour) but in this case I am going to wait until more details are available. I am put off by her alluding to misogynoir etc without evidence as it sounds as though she is jumping on an anti-Harry bandwagon.

Apparently, they raised quite a lot of money through the polo and less when the Chair tried other more localised means of fundraising.

People magazine have an 'inside' scoop on what went on behind the scenes, (wonder who dropped those tips to People), basically financial mismanagement since Dr. Chandauka became chair, (600k spent on consultants), leaving the charity in a precarious situation.

https://archive.ph/ies7s

When reached for comment, a representative for Chandauka tells PEOPLE:

"First and foremost, like much of the content circulated yesterday, a lot of information being shared is untrue and defamatory in nature. When we are ready as an organization, we will share more detail regarding the events leading up to this point. Moreover, the Board acts collectively on major decisions, and it would be inappropriate to assume decisions were made by any one person. As previously said, legal action was taken because of the cover-up of issues relating to abuse of power, misconduct, mismanagement, bullying, harassment, misogyny and misogynoir amongst other concerns."

If it refers to a whip then the phrase is offensive isn’t it? A whip that would have been used to beat enslaved people and indentured servants. I won’t be using that phrase again.

The English language is so versatile that it is easy to find alternatives to outdated phrases.

Remember Harry started this charity when very young and long before he married Markle so the grifter narrative you suggest may not apply here.

awww thanks :-)

I've been running round working on actual paying clients ;-) only just got my head back above water and ready to relax a bit on my fave message board :-)

Some raised eyebrows in the industry over Meghan's prioritising a clapback at her internet haters with the cute pie-eating stunt in Gwyneth's kitchen, just at the moment that Harry is losing one of his last remaining charities, and one which is of great personal importance to him.

Nevertheless, as we know, Meghan has herself experienced and bravely called out the misogyny and misgynoir and bullying to which she was subjected by the evil colonialist RF. Also, as per her Valentine's Day message, she is Harry's biggest supporter and will always stand by him; the salt to his pepper.

Therefore I am sure that we will soon hear from her in vocal support of her beloved husband and in fierce rebuttal of the baseless calumnies to which he has been subjected.

Any moment now.

In my professional life I've been witness to a few Board bust ups, and advised individuals on one side or the other. IMVVHO this bust-up can be read in one of two ways:

1. Sentebale was struggling and had already watered down its aims, from batting HIV/AIDS to the far more flimsy aim of 'promoting health and climate resilience'. This led to a decrease in donations and possibly there were operating issues and cultural red flags, which Dr Chandauka was explicitly appointed to solve (note she has a legal background) and to set the charity back on the right course. (It's very noticeable to me that their most high profile fundraising events take place not on the continent of Africa but in the US, and seem to be focussed on things Harry enjoys, such as polo, rather than things the charity's beneficiaries might reasonably enjoy and be expected to be proficient in.) Dr C takes the helm, spends the requisite time digging, dislikes what she sees and tries to whistleblow. This leads to a bust-up and the Trustees try to force her out; she resists and takes the fight to the courts and the media. OR:
2. Sentebale was broadly doing well, and its strategy of watering down the mission and doing fundraising events outside of Africa was working just fine. Dr C is a troublemaker who wouldn't listen to her white saviours Trustees and so they tried to oust her. She is now making up lies and taking thinly veiled swipes at Harry himself. As a lover of litigation and a brave warrior against the evil lies of the media, Harry can now countersue to protect his good name.

We shall see...but this is a story that's going to run and run....so the Sussexes had better get their PR fightback campaign up and running. Like, yesterday.

Is it really better to pretend the past did not exist? To push all references out of our knowledge? No more Baa baa black sheep because it references offensive over taxation of the poor? No more ‘pop goes the weasel’ as it glorifies alcoholism and debt? Actually best get rid of all nursery rhymes lest you reference torture (Mary Mary quite contrary), death penalty (oranges and lemons), or the death of millions (here we go round the mulberry bush). Better to be like the BBC rewriting our history to pretend half of Tudor Brits were black (but only the white ones were responsible for misdeeds).

When reached for comment, a representative for Chandauka tells PEOPLE:
"First and foremost, like much of the content circulated yesterday, a lot of information being shared is untrue and defamatory in nature. When we are ready as an organization, we will share more detail regarding the events leading up to this point. Moreover, the Board acts collectively on major decisions, and it would be inappropriate to assume decisions were made by any one person. As previously said, legal action was taken because of the cover-up of issues relating to abuse of power, misconduct, mismanagement, bullying, harassment, misogyny and misogynoir amongst other concerns."

This statement makes me more sceptical about Chandauka - the emphasis on the fact the Board acts collectively suggesting a wish to avoid responsibility, the wish to control the message (when we are ready…”, the accusations of defamation combined with accusations against others…

The great thing about the Mail is that they are rigorous to the point of paranoia about thoroughly lawyering every line they publish with a view to its standing up in court.

They've been that way since the editor starting receiving lawsuits and credible death threats during the Mail's brave campaign to unmask the real killers of Stephen Lawrence. And upped their legal structure after the hacking scandal.

The upshot of all that is that if you read something in the Daily Mail, you can be absolutely confident that it's true. Unlike other outlets such as the Indie, a once great paper that now can't afford lawyers or even journalists (they use an AI generator for a lot of stuff) and make mistakes all over the place.

The other thing about the Mail is that the Mail Online is the world's most read source of online news. So by picking this outlet, Dr C knew that her statement would be accessible to readers on all continents, and not behind a paywall.

She's being very well advised!

Yes you are right to correct me on that detail, I do think the charity was started by an idealistic young prince without ulterior motive.

IMO the archewell foundation has always been a vehicle for grift and once you have your hand in the till its a slippery slope

Nah that's just good corporate governance. The Board is a collective and collective decision making is one of its fiduciary duties.

I interpret that statement as Dr C saying, in effect "We, the Board, are sticking to the highest standards of good corporate governance; it is the Trustees who have acted unethically and according to low governance standards."

You cannot separate actions of the trustee from actions of the board. The trustees are the board (aka board of trustees) so if the trustees have acted unethically and according to low governance standards then so has the board due to collective responsibility.

You cannot say ‘the board acted collectively’ for Dr C’s actions and ‘trustees acted individually’ for everyone else’s.

"not enough room to swing a cat" and "let the cat out of the bag" are both references to the cat-o-nine tails whip, used by the British Navy to punish sailors and kept in a canvas bag.
I don't believe there is anything particularly racist about it

In terms of collective responsibility - it you disagree with the actions of another trustee and don’t wish to be associated with their actions then you either have to remove them or step down - which the rest of the board did when they couldn’t remove Dr C.

I think the fact the 'insider' allegations to People ([email protected] ??) do lend to there being a smear campaign in the works against her personally. It looks like she is the one who brought the concerns to the charity commission, and had to protect herself first by going to the high court to get an injunction against being fired.

Ridiculous.
You're actually saying you aren't sure where the phrase comes from but will stop using it anyway.
What do you do when someone says something that is properly insulting? You must explode in a cloud of self righteous virtue signalling

The same could be said of her statements. I suspect a more general falling out with issues all round.

Ah OK. I thought there would be a board of operational management overseen by a board of trustees who meet regularly but aren't in charge of the day to day.

Thank you for educating me in the Way of Charity :-)

So it's a proper boardroom bust-up, then. Exciting. I look forward to Dr C delivering on her promise to providing a timeline of what's led up to this point. I reckon it's going to be pretty explosive.

To be fair, I suspect Harrys' input into any of his charities is limited to showing up, doing a few fist pumps, pinching a male nipple here and there, cracking a few jokes and that's it, job done. So I am not sure how culpable he is in the governance issues in any way.

I’m just here for @GiveMeSpanakopita updates. Thank you.

So it's a proper boardroom bust-up, then. Exciting. I look forward to Dr C delivering on her promise to providing a timeline of what's led up to this point. I reckon it's going to be pretty explosive.

and selective.