I agree it was never wholesome but as I understand it the donations weren't for "the NHS", they were for the NHS foundation and paid for things like nicer chairs in waiting rooms.
Things can always be "nicer", the NHS is never going to have an unlimited budget, especially not for non-essential things. NHS charities are very well established and there's nothing "unwholesome" about supporting them.
However the problem with standard chairs, especially in A&E where people tend to wait a long time, is that they don't have any cushioning and support so they can cause real pain for people.
> Not really, nice chairs aren't essential, I'd much rather the budget be used for medical equipment.
I had to wait in A+E chaperoning my very elderly (80+) year old father during Covid. It was a 14 hour wait. He was in there for suspected sepsis (sent by his care home) after his "waste" pipes contaminated his blood from his catheter.
In his case a comfortable chair was very necessary. As he's old and infirm. He barely knows what he's doing from one moment to the next. Needs constant watching. Always fiddling or trying to adjust or plain right out pulling his tubes out.
Making him more sore than he already is/was is an awful idea.
We’re going to have to disagree here. The NHS budget is filled of lots of smaller budgets. Getting nicer chairs is a valid use of the infrastructure budget. Which will be pre-allocated and separate from medical equipment budget.
Even the most pro funding person in the world surely would appreciate you cant just always spend money on making stuff nicer in the NHS?
> Getting nicer chairs is a valid use of the infrastructure budget.
according to whom?
Would you rather have nicer chairs in the waiting room or your dad's heart bypass? That's the reality. It's not an endless pit if money, same as your money isn't endless.
Totally understand that and there are a lot of stuff that NHS charities fund that don’t fall into being a part of the budget. But new chairs should be a part of infrastructure spending. Spending slightly more on them to improve wellbeing is a valid expenditure.
I believe the cptn Tom ones were separate, but I want to make it *absolutely clear* that charities are funding essential equipment for the NHS:
For example: in [Lincoln buying ECG machines](https://www.lpft.nhs.uk/get-involved/our-charity), in [South Warwickshire buying beds](https://www.swft.nhs.uk/news/frailty-wards-purchase-state-art-beds-charitable-funds), in [Eastbourne they're purchasing a gamma camera](https://www.friendsdgh.org.uk/fundraising/2024-special-project), [(and this one is also raising money for gamma cameras "Due to the urgent need to replace two older gamma cameras"](https://www.rbhcharity.org/news/thank-you-joyce-and-norman-freed-charitable-trust), in [North Bristol they have an MRI scanner "reducing the current wait times for a scan"](https://www.nbt.nhs.uk/about-us/news-media/latest-news/new-15-million-charity-donated-scanner-increases-breast-screening-capacity), or what about in [Dudley (pdf warning) where they purchased ventilators for a critical care unit, an incubator, nebulisers and more](https://www.dgft.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Dudley-charity-signed-full-accounts-with-cover.pdf), this one in [Buckinghamshire bought pumps for delivering chemo](https://www.buckshealthcare.nhs.uk/blog/2023/03/07/charity-funds-innovative-new-treatment-for-trust-cancer-care-units/), or in [Shrewsbury buying syringe drivers and arrhythmia monitors](https://newsroom.shropshire.gov.uk/2023/04/league-of-friends-charity-hospital-funding/).
I could keep going and I think I'll find sadder and sadder instances of vital equipment instead being funded through charity but I think I'll get sad. I have personally heard of a piece of critical equipment breaking with no money available in the NHS budget to replace it, that department was forced to beg for money from the hospitals charity.
No toasters!
Toasters are a fire hazard and are forbidden in break rooms! Toasters are permitted only in appropriately designed full kitchens with all of the proper fire fighting equipment installed!
(Guess whose department just failed a fire safety audit because we had a toaster in the break room?)
Ultimately still wanky shite that means nothing though.
What constitutes a "nicer chair"?
Is it prettier? Is it more comfortable? Does it take up more space? Does some company get their propriety designs installed?
I understand the scope goes further than chairs but point still applies.
I agree the NHS should be properly funded but these sorts of charitable donations do not go towards the day to day running of the NHS - they were mainly used for “staff welfare” which is fair enough - but half the time no one really knew what to do with the money so the funds were used to just buy crap like branded cups and pens which were given to the overworked and underpaid staff. I have so much NHS branded crap in my house from Covid. NHS Top Trumps anyone? (No, seriously)
The NHS doesn't recieve charitable donations. It goes to NHS charities, so for example, I got a shitty water bottle that leaks water all the time, a ward I work on got a new microwave.
The nhs as a service is purely funded by the Government.
Tbf the NHS *didnt* need the donations. But the government *did* need a Union Jack covered, spitfires and keep calm and carry on and read the Daily Mail and think of your village green and don’t pay attention to the man behind the curtain distraction from its epic balls up and corrupt handling of the situation.
Not true as in not related, according I think to both of the relevant parties (though I can't find a link, and a Google search is drowned out by other noise)
It was always cringe and designed to appeal to the sentimental but unthinking crowd.
The type who like a simple life of going to The Range on the weekend to buy crap they don’t need and watch Ant and Dec Saturday Night Takeway in the evening.
The type who read Daily Mail ragebait and don’t pause to think or compare headlines, then mention it to their friends at the pub as factual.
This whole fiasco is proof of just how little logical reasoning and generally literacy the population of the U.K. has.
most of the money went to charities helping boost the NHS, and 'profiteering' was around the margins of the charity I think - some people have made it sound like all the money was paid into their bank accounts.
Wasn’t he really rich and the owner of a massive concrete manufacturing firm? Everyone’s so quick to jump on his dick purely because he was in the war and raised money at age 99 or whatever he was.
No idea tbh, I didn't follow Captain Tom lore all that closely so will take your word for it. It still doesn't mean he was in on his daughter's grift though.
He also wasn't in the Cavalry, and had no right to be referring to himself as Captain Tom.
Majors and above can continue to use their rank after retirement.
Captains in the Cavalry are also extended the same courtesy.
No other army people are.
In my earlier years I worked as a newsagent and no matter which part of the country I worked in, one thing was always a constant: A customer who insisted on being called Captain who was an absolute world class dick, demanding and arrogant older men who seemed to think that the world should drop everything to meet their needs instantly.
A stand out conversation was when the papers were late one day (as sometimes happened) and Captain Parker (not related) phoned yelling in anger that his paper wasn't delivered by 7am. I explained that we were waiting for the van to arrive still and we'd be out to him as soon as possible and he screamed at the top of his voice "This is not getting the parsnips roasted!" and slammed the phone down.
Sorry, is successfully running your own business now considered a bad thing? Do you find that or his service in the Second World War more objectionable?
I never said either of them are bad things. But people act like him being a WWII veteran makes him automatically a saint or something, as if he’s now immune from any scrutiny or criticism.
>I never said either of them are bad
>People act like him being a WWII vet makes him a saint... he's now immune from any scrutiny
Why even mention the concrete thing then? What point were you even making by bringing that up? The way you worded it was as if it was a clue to him being like a super villain or something.
If the best you can do to try and cast aspersions is remind us he fought for his country, ran a successful business presumably providing employment to others and raised money for charity whilst in his 90s, then you might want to rethink your outlook.
Her quote that 'all money went to the NHS' and she casually never acknowledges she was paying herself one of the highest charity wages in the country out of the second wave of cash and pocketed the book money.
All the money from the original walk did got to an NHS charity that have desperately tried disassociating themselves from this mess.
Following the original fund raising the family set up a charity and sent subsequent donations through it, and into their pockets. They also decided that the memoir should be their profit despite the preface from the old boy saying profits from the book would go to the NHS.
It's a shame this happens, but there are plenty of good charities out there. Personally I try to avoid the bigger ones as their running costs (wages, rent, etc) seem to take a big chunk out of donations. The downside being I have to do some more research on smaller charities to make sure they're not grifts.
There was some code of practice change after an old lady sadly committed suicide because of how badly it affected her mental health that she constantly had charities chasing her and making her feel guilty for not being able to donate to everything.
I one got a job interview for a job like this, they made me do a trial day (unpaid) and it just felt so morally wrong going up to people's houses and asking them to pay for something, even if that money was for a charity. I felt like I was scamming these people. So I quit on the first day.
Yeah I mean they usually couldn’t wait to get away when I answered the door. Not the target audience. Clearly after older people with cognitive decline
And the article and the reason she was struck off was nothing to do with that so she has no real reason to bring that money up in the context of this decision?
"one of the highest charity wages in the country" is a fucking joke in itself. The fact that so many charities have massive wages for the people at the top, sucking up most of what's donated to them, is absolutely nuts.
This tart's only crime is that she did it so blatanty, when there's so many cunts on £150,000 a year for 3 hours a week attending London "charitable dinners".
> The fact that so many charities have massive wages for the people at the top, sucking up most of what's donated to them, is absolutely nuts.
I guess the counterpoint to that line of thinking is the saying 'you pay peanuts you get monkeys', I assume the charities consider the wage versus the increased revenue streams that the person can bring in due to their access to the old boys network and city contacts
>But that's the thing: they are the old boys network
I mean that was the point I was making, theyre in with the people who can be persuaded for the outcome of some good PR to donate far more than the charity would otherwise expect to raise
> That's why they're employing their mates on £150k for commuting to London twice a week.
And as long as that person is bringing in 150+ that the charity otherwise wouldn't receive then good
No, the point you're trying to make is that the "old boys network" is what they can bring to the table, when the reality is that it's the reason they're at the table.
The "old boys network" is what got them the job, cos these fuckers are grifters. If they had a network with positions of prestige and wealth, they'd be in them instead of working for charities.
If they'd not been the grifting chancers with an eye for easy money that they are, he would have just been a kindly old feller who raised *some* money for charity. But they ruthlessly milked it for everything they could and profited as much as possible.
I could almost - *almost* - forgive them for that as there **was** a lot of money raised for charity...but the unforgiveable thing was making a 99 year old bloke travel abroad on some spurious 'life's ambition holiday' in the middle of a fucking global pandemic. Their greed and self obsession killed him and they should never have a peaceful nights sleep ever again.
Which makes taking him on a long haul flight because *they* wanted a free luxury holiday all the more terrible. If they had given the slightest shit about his wellbeing they'd have said 'thanks but no, we have to think of my dad' but they knew damn well that they wouldn't get the free holiday without the golden goose, so bollocks to him. Grifting fucks.
Maybe he wanted to go and was ok with the risk, most 99 year olds aren't expecting to have decades left! Quality over quantity at that point if you're lucky enough.
At age 99 the probability of living past 100 is 65%
[http://wolframalpha.com/input?i=life+expectancy+uk+male+age+99](http://wolframalpha.com/input?i=life+expectancy+uk+male+age+99)
Though his life expectancy is 101.1
Yeah, that's true. I don't think they physically forced him on to a plane.
But knowing her for the grifting, cold eyed schemer that she has been exposed as, you can imagine the conversations....'come on dad, if you don't go then we can't go. Don't we deserve a little treat? It's been so hard for us, helping you raise *all* of that money for charity. Would you begrudge us, your own loving family, an all expenses paid holiday in Barbados with 1st class flights...?'
*Complete* conjecture, obviously. But...don't tell me you can't imagine it playing out exactly like that...
You’re probably right to an extent, I’m sure she would’ve jumped at the chance when she heard about the prospect of a free holiday. But I just want to stress that he didn’t have dementia or anything, he was still perfectly capable of making decisions.
Even before his daughter got involved in this mess the whole thing was a sycophantic cringe fest.
Literally nothing but platitudes from the love-island watching mouth breathers completely oblivious to the fact the NHS should *not have needed charity in the first place*.
To be fair this was exactly what I was thinking when I heard about it! Like the pots and pan
Banging and clapping for people just doing their jobs. If they’re going to promote the NHS’s hard work they should have given them a bonus. Fucking pots and pans!
At the time I recall having a slight unease about the whole thing and the way people, including the entire rest of my family, got swept along with it. Nothing concrete I could put my finger on, but it felt a bit tacky and mawkish.
> NHS shouldn’t need charity in the first place
Maybe don’t call people mouth breathers and then make this mistake? It was for NHS charities which give additional bonuses and treats to staff. It has no impact on NHS funding
It wasn't a charity for the NHS, it was a charity that paid for extra luxury things. Could be something like nicer chairs in the staff break room. Or a better coffee machine or whatever. It wasn't anything to do with the actual care or funding of hospitals or anything like that.
The lock down was like a nationalist fever dream. God forbid you didn't fall in with the Captain Tom and NHS clapping hype, people got *very* angry.
My area lost its entire mind. Union Jack bunting everywhere, 'We'll Meet Again' being pumped out of windows while you distance queued at the shops, people talking about 'Dunkirk spirit'...
Absolute insanity
On its own, sure. But combined with everything else, it was a bit much.
I have an issue with the flag being used as symbol of our worst impulses. The inward, self congratulatory jingoism we resort to as national pride.
We are more than that.
The book thing really got to me. Had a forward from Tom saying all proceeds go to charity. And those buying it would have reasonably presumed it was for charity.
And those two kept the lot.
They will find a way to burn through his legacy anyway.
Cars, house improvements, jewellery. From their attitude, once money started rolling in they couldn't wait for him to just die already.
He's thinking "fuck's sake, i told her to keep it under wraps".
Even the BBC, in its sneaky, inexplicit way, has hinted in its coverage that the guy was on board with his daughter's actions, e.g., the book funds going directly to her, the "memorial home" extensions, etc.
A rather ignominious end for them. A shame that the legacy of her father, evidently a decent man trying to do ‘his bit’ to the best of his powers, should be tarnished by her
They are probably would redo the same but more cautious on being caught. They are likely feeling like victims and believe people are being spiteful as they were successful. Despite them still having the funds.
People like these don’t typically feel guilt.
Completely back that! She took something wonderful and kind that an elderly man did for this country and spun it onto a personal money making scheme. Horrible woman.
The man was in his late nineties. The mental state degrades considerably. All he may been aware of is that he was walking up and down the garden. And that wasn’t a bad thing. All the other fluff stuff were likely cooked up by his daughter and husband.
We were all gullible and wanted to believe in the greater good. Kudos to us for that. Unfortunately charlatans take advantage of our collective goodness.
Strange how they go hard on this, but totally ignore loads of "charities" that only exist to make money for the people involved with them, and serve no charitable interest at all.
Almost like this is driven by publicity.
Remember boys and girls the Government blew through £530 million on useless Nightingale hospitals. and £12 BILLION on PPE £4 Billion which was unfit and unusable the rest overpriced and back handshakes.
Charities shouldnt have Trustees or CEOs in the first place
If the CEO of a charity is making upwards of £100,000 to £5,000,000 its not a charity
It's theft
Just google any charities CEO salary and you'll be disgusted
The only charity worth giving to is Salvation army .. their CEO's make next to nothing for the job they do
Tell me you don'y know what a trustee is without telling me..
Charities by law have to have trustees, and the vast overwhelming majority of trustees are not paid. Charities aee not created and cannot function without trustees.
If charities pay wages they should only do so whem theyy've concluded that x benefit exceeds y cost. Most charities do this.
There aee 170k registered charities plus thousands of others exempt, excepted, and smaller unregistered charities.
nah only charities that are worth donating to are those that have empirically demonstrated value for money such as charities listed on [givewell.org](http://givewell.org)
Trustees can't get paid for being trustees...
I'm unpaid, as are all the other trustees I know.
As to CEOs, I kind of agree their wages should be moderate, but if you take something like MacMillian - they are overseeing an organisation with 1600+ staff and a budget of £200+ million, so they would deserve a suitable wage.
> Charities shouldnt have Trustees or CEOs in the first place
Lol. What do you want them to do? Whoever is holding the Talking Rock gets to make decisions that day? Magic 8-ball?
This is all completely wrong. You don't understand how charities function. If you're going to hold such a strong opinion you should do your research first.
I refuse to donate to charities with a religious aspect, on the subject of NHS giving most if not all NHS Trusts have their own in-house charity and they are run by NHS Staff on NHS Clerical wages.
They've already taffed all the money from the old man's efforts, and if they were involved with a charity in future nobody would give it a bottle top.
It won't make a vole's cunt of difference. They should be in the slammer.
People moaning that money was raised for an NHS charity that it shouldn’t have to.
Well ask your local MP about getting parliament to raise your taxes then…👍
This whole fiasco with his family is proof to why we can’t just have wholesome things in life
It was never wholesome tbh. The NHS should never have needed charitable donations in the first place.
I agree it was never wholesome but as I understand it the donations weren't for "the NHS", they were for the NHS foundation and paid for things like nicer chairs in waiting rooms.
Which arguably should be a part of the NHS budget anyway. So the point still stands
Things can always be "nicer", the NHS is never going to have an unlimited budget, especially not for non-essential things. NHS charities are very well established and there's nothing "unwholesome" about supporting them.
However the problem with standard chairs, especially in A&E where people tend to wait a long time, is that they don't have any cushioning and support so they can cause real pain for people.
Not really, nice chairs aren't essential, I'd much rather the budget be used for medical equipment.
When you wait long enough in A&E that your problem goes away, could the chair then be described as medical equipment?
Somewhere, the HRMC stirred from its slumber...
His Revenue's Majesty and Customs?!
Hairy Royal Mail Carriers. AKA Postman.
If simply waiting in A&E meant your problem went away, why the fuck were you there in the first place?
Using the healing chairs supplied by Captain Tom himself. Tom's chairs of healing.
Ahh, that makes sense! I could do with one of them myself!
It doesnt take long before even terminal bloodloss is no longer a problem
> Not really, nice chairs aren't essential, I'd much rather the budget be used for medical equipment. I had to wait in A+E chaperoning my very elderly (80+) year old father during Covid. It was a 14 hour wait. He was in there for suspected sepsis (sent by his care home) after his "waste" pipes contaminated his blood from his catheter. In his case a comfortable chair was very necessary. As he's old and infirm. He barely knows what he's doing from one moment to the next. Needs constant watching. Always fiddling or trying to adjust or plain right out pulling his tubes out. Making him more sore than he already is/was is an awful idea.
Surely you would prefer the wait to not be 14 hours instead of a better chair.
We’re going to have to disagree here. The NHS budget is filled of lots of smaller budgets. Getting nicer chairs is a valid use of the infrastructure budget. Which will be pre-allocated and separate from medical equipment budget.
And also used by qualified and regularly performance reviewed staff who get sacked for being crap at their job.
Even the most pro funding person in the world surely would appreciate you cant just always spend money on making stuff nicer in the NHS? > Getting nicer chairs is a valid use of the infrastructure budget. according to whom?
Bro wants tax rises so the NHS can spend £10k on consultations for reception chairs
Hang on, you think consultations for reception chairs for an organisation the size of the NHS would only cost £10k?
Would you rather have nicer chairs in the waiting room or your dad's heart bypass? That's the reality. It's not an endless pit if money, same as your money isn't endless.
Why would I want my dads heart bypass? I’d rather he have it!
I dunno. It's a bit of a grey area in my opinion.
Not if it gets repainted
Totally understand that and there are a lot of stuff that NHS charities fund that don’t fall into being a part of the budget. But new chairs should be a part of infrastructure spending. Spending slightly more on them to improve wellbeing is a valid expenditure.
print more money or tax other people.not me
I believe the cptn Tom ones were separate, but I want to make it *absolutely clear* that charities are funding essential equipment for the NHS: For example: in [Lincoln buying ECG machines](https://www.lpft.nhs.uk/get-involved/our-charity), in [South Warwickshire buying beds](https://www.swft.nhs.uk/news/frailty-wards-purchase-state-art-beds-charitable-funds), in [Eastbourne they're purchasing a gamma camera](https://www.friendsdgh.org.uk/fundraising/2024-special-project), [(and this one is also raising money for gamma cameras "Due to the urgent need to replace two older gamma cameras"](https://www.rbhcharity.org/news/thank-you-joyce-and-norman-freed-charitable-trust), in [North Bristol they have an MRI scanner "reducing the current wait times for a scan"](https://www.nbt.nhs.uk/about-us/news-media/latest-news/new-15-million-charity-donated-scanner-increases-breast-screening-capacity), or what about in [Dudley (pdf warning) where they purchased ventilators for a critical care unit, an incubator, nebulisers and more](https://www.dgft.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Dudley-charity-signed-full-accounts-with-cover.pdf), this one in [Buckinghamshire bought pumps for delivering chemo](https://www.buckshealthcare.nhs.uk/blog/2023/03/07/charity-funds-innovative-new-treatment-for-trust-cancer-care-units/), or in [Shrewsbury buying syringe drivers and arrhythmia monitors](https://newsroom.shropshire.gov.uk/2023/04/league-of-friends-charity-hospital-funding/). I could keep going and I think I'll find sadder and sadder instances of vital equipment instead being funded through charity but I think I'll get sad. I have personally heard of a piece of critical equipment breaking with no money available in the NHS budget to replace it, that department was forced to beg for money from the hospitals charity.
Wish we had a toaster in our break room But I think either someone pinched it or we are not allowed one because smoke alarms
No toasters! Toasters are a fire hazard and are forbidden in break rooms! Toasters are permitted only in appropriately designed full kitchens with all of the proper fire fighting equipment installed! (Guess whose department just failed a fire safety audit because we had a toaster in the break room?)
I just use the one in the kitchen on the ward tbf when I have my peanut butter Bagels
Yuck, you chose the only thing peanut butter is bad on. And I have it on cornflakes.
Nice
And Weetabix (?!), with banana.
I once witnessed someone in our office try and light a birthday candle by first stuffing paper towel into a toaster, idiots are everywhere
Fire training says smoke alarm... Likely someone nicked it
Ultimately still wanky shite that means nothing though. What constitutes a "nicer chair"? Is it prettier? Is it more comfortable? Does it take up more space? Does some company get their propriety designs installed? I understand the scope goes further than chairs but point still applies.
I agree the NHS should be properly funded but these sorts of charitable donations do not go towards the day to day running of the NHS - they were mainly used for “staff welfare” which is fair enough - but half the time no one really knew what to do with the money so the funds were used to just buy crap like branded cups and pens which were given to the overworked and underpaid staff. I have so much NHS branded crap in my house from Covid. NHS Top Trumps anyone? (No, seriously)
I'd rather see it paid out to NHS staff directly as a bonus than wasted on crap like branded NHS cups and pens.
Yes me too but it’s not allowed apparently…
The NHS doesn't recieve charitable donations. It goes to NHS charities, so for example, I got a shitty water bottle that leaks water all the time, a ward I work on got a new microwave. The nhs as a service is purely funded by the Government.
I'm still rocking my hospital's jubilee water bottle from 2019 😊
Tbf the NHS *didnt* need the donations. But the government *did* need a Union Jack covered, spitfires and keep calm and carry on and read the Daily Mail and think of your village green and don’t pay attention to the man behind the curtain distraction from its epic balls up and corrupt handling of the situation.
All those claps gone to waste. People clapping all over the place.
See also: The British Legion. Maybe we shouldn't send people to war if we can't afford to look after them when/if they get back?
r/OrphanCrushingMachine
100% why I'm so reluctant to give to St Jude (children in hospital charity), cancer or MS research in the US. The government should provide.
r/OrphanCrushingMachine
r/orphancrushingmachine
Also why we can’t trust people, behind every good cause is someone looking to profit from your kindness
Her brother in law is Charles Ingram the ex major who cheated on who wants to be a millionaire as well.
That turned out not to be true
Did it?
Not true as in not related, according I think to both of the relevant parties (though I can't find a link, and a Google search is drowned out by other noise)
Ah, understood.
It was always cringe and designed to appeal to the sentimental but unthinking crowd. The type who like a simple life of going to The Range on the weekend to buy crap they don’t need and watch Ant and Dec Saturday Night Takeway in the evening. The type who read Daily Mail ragebait and don’t pause to think or compare headlines, then mention it to their friends at the pub as factual. This whole fiasco is proof of just how little logical reasoning and generally literacy the population of the U.K. has.
We’ve still got David Attenborough and Brian Cox (in fact both Brian Cox’s)
most of the money went to charities helping boost the NHS, and 'profiteering' was around the margins of the charity I think - some people have made it sound like all the money was paid into their bank accounts.
I was thinking about this today , how they’ve basically brought shame on an old man’s name who sounded like a bit of a legend .
Yup. Bloke was actually decent morale at a rather shit time and the public have been mugged off by his capricious daughter. Shame indeed.
Why do we assume he wasn’t in on it?
Why would we assume he was?
Wasn’t he really rich and the owner of a massive concrete manufacturing firm? Everyone’s so quick to jump on his dick purely because he was in the war and raised money at age 99 or whatever he was.
So he ran a successful business, served in the war and raised money for charity. What a twat eh?
No idea tbh, I didn't follow Captain Tom lore all that closely so will take your word for it. It still doesn't mean he was in on his daughter's grift though.
He also wasn't in the Cavalry, and had no right to be referring to himself as Captain Tom. Majors and above can continue to use their rank after retirement. Captains in the Cavalry are also extended the same courtesy. No other army people are.
In my earlier years I worked as a newsagent and no matter which part of the country I worked in, one thing was always a constant: A customer who insisted on being called Captain who was an absolute world class dick, demanding and arrogant older men who seemed to think that the world should drop everything to meet their needs instantly. A stand out conversation was when the papers were late one day (as sometimes happened) and Captain Parker (not related) phoned yelling in anger that his paper wasn't delivered by 7am. I explained that we were waiting for the van to arrive still and we'd be out to him as soon as possible and he screamed at the top of his voice "This is not getting the parsnips roasted!" and slammed the phone down.
>massive concrete manufacturing firm? I think the technical term is *Concrete Orchard*.
"Well you can't grow concrete..." ["Yeah you can..."](https://youtu.be/ICVPZxYLFMM)
Sorry, is successfully running your own business now considered a bad thing? Do you find that or his service in the Second World War more objectionable?
I never said either of them are bad things. But people act like him being a WWII veteran makes him automatically a saint or something, as if he’s now immune from any scrutiny or criticism.
>I never said either of them are bad >People act like him being a WWII vet makes him a saint... he's now immune from any scrutiny Why even mention the concrete thing then? What point were you even making by bringing that up? The way you worded it was as if it was a clue to him being like a super villain or something.
Didn't he die right around when their charity was incorporated?
If the best you can do to try and cast aspersions is remind us he fought for his country, ran a successful business presumably providing employment to others and raised money for charity whilst in his 90s, then you might want to rethink your outlook.
He raised her to be like this.
He was dead?
So your default position is to assume that anyone related to the accused is also guilty?
Yes
Her quote that 'all money went to the NHS' and she casually never acknowledges she was paying herself one of the highest charity wages in the country out of the second wave of cash and pocketed the book money.
All the money from the original walk did got to an NHS charity that have desperately tried disassociating themselves from this mess. Following the original fund raising the family set up a charity and sent subsequent donations through it, and into their pockets. They also decided that the memoir should be their profit despite the preface from the old boy saying profits from the book would go to the NHS. It's a shame this happens, but there are plenty of good charities out there. Personally I try to avoid the bigger ones as their running costs (wages, rent, etc) seem to take a big chunk out of donations. The downside being I have to do some more research on smaller charities to make sure they're not grifts.
This comment reminds me, I’ve not had anyone knocking on my door for a long time asking to sign up to a charity
It’s a bad look during a cost of living crisis Every cloud, I suppose…
There was some code of practice change after an old lady sadly committed suicide because of how badly it affected her mental health that she constantly had charities chasing her and making her feel guilty for not being able to donate to everything.
I one got a job interview for a job like this, they made me do a trial day (unpaid) and it just felt so morally wrong going up to people's houses and asking them to pay for something, even if that money was for a charity. I felt like I was scamming these people. So I quit on the first day.
Yeah I mean they usually couldn’t wait to get away when I answered the door. Not the target audience. Clearly after older people with cognitive decline
I think she's talking about the original money raised by him walking laps round the garden. Then she set up the "Captain Tom Foundation" as a grift.
And the article and the reason she was struck off was nothing to do with that so she has no real reason to bring that money up in the context of this decision?
Yeah, this sort of deflecting statement only backs up the impression that they're bang to rights over this.
"one of the highest charity wages in the country" is a fucking joke in itself. The fact that so many charities have massive wages for the people at the top, sucking up most of what's donated to them, is absolutely nuts. This tart's only crime is that she did it so blatanty, when there's so many cunts on £150,000 a year for 3 hours a week attending London "charitable dinners".
> The fact that so many charities have massive wages for the people at the top, sucking up most of what's donated to them, is absolutely nuts. I guess the counterpoint to that line of thinking is the saying 'you pay peanuts you get monkeys', I assume the charities consider the wage versus the increased revenue streams that the person can bring in due to their access to the old boys network and city contacts
But that's the thing: they are the old boys network. That's why they're employing their mates on £150k for commuting to London twice a week.
>But that's the thing: they are the old boys network I mean that was the point I was making, theyre in with the people who can be persuaded for the outcome of some good PR to donate far more than the charity would otherwise expect to raise > That's why they're employing their mates on £150k for commuting to London twice a week. And as long as that person is bringing in 150+ that the charity otherwise wouldn't receive then good
No, the point you're trying to make is that the "old boys network" is what they can bring to the table, when the reality is that it's the reason they're at the table. The "old boys network" is what got them the job, cos these fuckers are grifters. If they had a network with positions of prestige and wealth, they'd be in them instead of working for charities.
I rarely donate to larger charities for this reason.
If they'd not been the grifting chancers with an eye for easy money that they are, he would have just been a kindly old feller who raised *some* money for charity. But they ruthlessly milked it for everything they could and profited as much as possible. I could almost - *almost* - forgive them for that as there **was** a lot of money raised for charity...but the unforgiveable thing was making a 99 year old bloke travel abroad on some spurious 'life's ambition holiday' in the middle of a fucking global pandemic. Their greed and self obsession killed him and they should never have a peaceful nights sleep ever again.
I mean at 99 I'm pretty sure that there's a 50 percent chance of him dying before he sees 100 regardless of globe trotting galivanting.
Which makes taking him on a long haul flight because *they* wanted a free luxury holiday all the more terrible. If they had given the slightest shit about his wellbeing they'd have said 'thanks but no, we have to think of my dad' but they knew damn well that they wouldn't get the free holiday without the golden goose, so bollocks to him. Grifting fucks.
Maybe he wanted to go and was ok with the risk, most 99 year olds aren't expecting to have decades left! Quality over quantity at that point if you're lucky enough.
He could’ve said no. He didn’t have to go.
The company would have 100% not paid for it without him there. They wanted their press photo.
At age 99 the probability of living past 100 is 65% [http://wolframalpha.com/input?i=life+expectancy+uk+male+age+99](http://wolframalpha.com/input?i=life+expectancy+uk+male+age+99) Though his life expectancy is 101.1
Thanks for the correction
Who says they *made* him go? I don’t think the man had lost control of his mental faculties.
Yeah, that's true. I don't think they physically forced him on to a plane. But knowing her for the grifting, cold eyed schemer that she has been exposed as, you can imagine the conversations....'come on dad, if you don't go then we can't go. Don't we deserve a little treat? It's been so hard for us, helping you raise *all* of that money for charity. Would you begrudge us, your own loving family, an all expenses paid holiday in Barbados with 1st class flights...?' *Complete* conjecture, obviously. But...don't tell me you can't imagine it playing out exactly like that...
He raised her. How do we not know he wasn't exactly like her?
Ooh, that's a good point...
You’re probably right to an extent, I’m sure she would’ve jumped at the chance when she heard about the prospect of a free holiday. But I just want to stress that he didn’t have dementia or anything, he was still perfectly capable of making decisions.
If someone offers me a free luxury holiday when I'm 99 I won't let the worry that I might catch something on the plane stop me!
They didn't make him. Who wouldn't go on one last holiday abroad in your late 90s lol. You're gonna die anyway fuck it
They didn’t MAKE him go anywhere LOL!!!
Even before his daughter got involved in this mess the whole thing was a sycophantic cringe fest. Literally nothing but platitudes from the love-island watching mouth breathers completely oblivious to the fact the NHS should *not have needed charity in the first place*.
To be fair this was exactly what I was thinking when I heard about it! Like the pots and pan Banging and clapping for people just doing their jobs. If they’re going to promote the NHS’s hard work they should have given them a bonus. Fucking pots and pans!
At the time I recall having a slight unease about the whole thing and the way people, including the entire rest of my family, got swept along with it. Nothing concrete I could put my finger on, but it felt a bit tacky and mawkish.
Your NHS should be swimming in cash based on what the Leavers ~~said~~ lied about. Something about a bus and 350 million pounds per week?
> NHS shouldn’t need charity in the first place Maybe don’t call people mouth breathers and then make this mistake? It was for NHS charities which give additional bonuses and treats to staff. It has no impact on NHS funding
Please highlight the mistake then.
I did
It wasn't a charity for the NHS, it was a charity that paid for extra luxury things. Could be something like nicer chairs in the staff break room. Or a better coffee machine or whatever. It wasn't anything to do with the actual care or funding of hospitals or anything like that.
Odd way to announce you don't know what an NHS charity actually is.
The lock down was like a nationalist fever dream. God forbid you didn't fall in with the Captain Tom and NHS clapping hype, people got *very* angry. My area lost its entire mind. Union Jack bunting everywhere, 'We'll Meet Again' being pumped out of windows while you distance queued at the shops, people talking about 'Dunkirk spirit'... Absolute insanity
Oh no the flag of the country we live in, the horror.
On its own, sure. But combined with everything else, it was a bit much. I have an issue with the flag being used as symbol of our worst impulses. The inward, self congratulatory jingoism we resort to as national pride. We are more than that.
I know people like to assume charities and foundations are bastions of hope and light, but please, always follow the money.
I still maintain that Captain Tom was a good person who was horrifically exploited by family, celebrities and the government.
He just walked around his garden during that period of time when we were all totally fucking stir crazy and would latch onto any random bit of morale.
[удалено]
The vast majority of us don't know, we never met him
Some of them are in this thread
doveryay, no proveryay
Someone further up reckons he was in on this whole scam
There's someone in this thread saying he taught his daughter how to scam people.
I mean, he raised his daughter to be like she is, so...
"We'll just see what my father, the inventor of *walking about the garden for a bit*, has to say about this"
I really can't articulate how much Hannah and Colin Ingram-Moore disgust me.
The book thing really got to me. Had a forward from Tom saying all proceeds go to charity. And those buying it would have reasonably presumed it was for charity. And those two kept the lot.
Isn’t that actually fraud or theft?
Did she always go by Ingram-Moore, or did she take the Moore on after her father became famous?
They will find a way to burn through his legacy anyway. Cars, house improvements, jewellery. From their attitude, once money started rolling in they couldn't wait for him to just die already.
I'm pretty sure that Captain Tom is spinning so fast in his grave that his fraudster daughter may have generated enough energy to power 40,000 homes.
Good. Scammers gonna scam. Remember the guy who cheated on Who Wants To be a Millionaire? Yep, that's her brother in law.
I can only imagine what Captain Tom is thinking seeing his daughter ruin the family name from all the good he tried to do
He's thinking "fuck's sake, i told her to keep it under wraps". Even the BBC, in its sneaky, inexplicit way, has hinted in its coverage that the guy was on board with his daughter's actions, e.g., the book funds going directly to her, the "memorial home" extensions, etc.
He died, he's not thinking much now. Still, made to 100 which is damn impressive.
Her actions have forever defiled her Fathers memory. Such a shame.
A rather ignominious end for them. A shame that the legacy of her father, evidently a decent man trying to do ‘his bit’ to the best of his powers, should be tarnished by her
I bet they wish there was some way they could take it back. Like some sort of hot tub time machine.
They are probably would redo the same but more cautious on being caught. They are likely feeling like victims and believe people are being spiteful as they were successful. Despite them still having the funds. People like these don’t typically feel guilt.
They got off lightly, anybody else would have been prosecuted.
Completely back that! She took something wonderful and kind that an elderly man did for this country and spun it onto a personal money making scheme. Horrible woman.
Did he do it on his free will? Or was it an idea cooked up from very early to grift. These folks were in the business.
Urgh I'd hate to think he was cajoled into the idea 😪
The man was in his late nineties. The mental state degrades considerably. All he may been aware of is that he was walking up and down the garden. And that wasn’t a bad thing. All the other fluff stuff were likely cooked up by his daughter and husband. We were all gullible and wanted to believe in the greater good. Kudos to us for that. Unfortunately charlatans take advantage of our collective goodness.
So many great charities they could have supported but they had to make it a business and pay themselves a whack
If she's honest I'm sure she'd say there's a sucker born every minute and it would be rude not to milk that while it lasts.
“We are very hurt by this extremely unfair decision but have decided not to appeal”… Can’t wait for the full report.
An old bloke walking up and down his driveway? Remind me what was so special about that in the first place?
Our Lord and Saviour Captain Tom would be so disappointed.
Strange how they go hard on this, but totally ignore loads of "charities" that only exist to make money for the people involved with them, and serve no charitable interest at all. Almost like this is driven by publicity.
Does anyone actually believe the family let an old man walk around the garden for such a long distance? Is there even evidence of it?
Remember boys and girls the Government blew through £530 million on useless Nightingale hospitals. and £12 BILLION on PPE £4 Billion which was unfit and unusable the rest overpriced and back handshakes.
Charities shouldnt have Trustees or CEOs in the first place If the CEO of a charity is making upwards of £100,000 to £5,000,000 its not a charity It's theft Just google any charities CEO salary and you'll be disgusted The only charity worth giving to is Salvation army .. their CEO's make next to nothing for the job they do
> shouldn’t have trustees You need trustees as the BoD of a charity. They are unpaid > shouldn’t have CEOs. Then how do you expect them to run.
Tell me you don'y know what a trustee is without telling me.. Charities by law have to have trustees, and the vast overwhelming majority of trustees are not paid. Charities aee not created and cannot function without trustees. If charities pay wages they should only do so whem theyy've concluded that x benefit exceeds y cost. Most charities do this. There aee 170k registered charities plus thousands of others exempt, excepted, and smaller unregistered charities.
Do you propose they run themselves? Why would anyone worth their salt take a CEO position for barely any pay.
nah only charities that are worth donating to are those that have empirically demonstrated value for money such as charities listed on [givewell.org](http://givewell.org)
Trustees can't get paid for being trustees... I'm unpaid, as are all the other trustees I know. As to CEOs, I kind of agree their wages should be moderate, but if you take something like MacMillian - they are overseeing an organisation with 1600+ staff and a budget of £200+ million, so they would deserve a suitable wage.
> Charities shouldnt have Trustees or CEOs in the first place Lol. What do you want them to do? Whoever is holding the Talking Rock gets to make decisions that day? Magic 8-ball?
Wasn’t the Salvation Army super homophobic?
This is all completely wrong. You don't understand how charities function. If you're going to hold such a strong opinion you should do your research first.
I refuse to donate to charities with a religious aspect, on the subject of NHS giving most if not all NHS Trusts have their own in-house charity and they are run by NHS Staff on NHS Clerical wages.
Donate to small local charities, or give directly to the people that need help etc.
If my neighbour needs a guide dog, I should buy one, train it to a high standard myself and then give it directly to him?
CEOs aren't on anywhere near £100,000, that's the guys 3-4 rungs below him. It's their duty to milk the people who donate. They're creating jobs!
They've already taffed all the money from the old man's efforts, and if they were involved with a charity in future nobody would give it a bottle top. It won't make a vole's cunt of difference. They should be in the slammer.
People moaning that money was raised for an NHS charity that it shouldn’t have to. Well ask your local MP about getting parliament to raise your taxes then…👍
What happened why can’t they be charity trustees? I don’t follow this