Buy

Books
Click images for more details

Support

 

Twitter
Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing
Links

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace
« Fred Pearce calls for Patchy's head | Main | A measured view from Grantham »
Saturday
Oct022010

A coverup at the Charities Commission?

Christopher Booker returns to the subject of Rajendra Pachauri and his Teri-Europe charity and wonders why the Charities Commission were so understanding about Teri having failed to declare as much as 80% of its income.

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

Reader Comments (28)

I doubt very much that the Charity Commissioner would have been so understanding if a less favoured charity managed to misplace 90% of it's income, or whose trustees were not doing their job. I shall ask my MP to press for an explanation of why the Commissioner is just not doing her job properly, and strongly suggest she step aside. One wonders how many other charities are not up to date, or whose accountants 'misplace' hundreds of thousands of pounds.

I notice that after a four year investigation however, the CC has decided that 'druids' constitute a religion, based partly on their concern for nature and the environment. Must have taken all the staff time up on that, so little time left for sanity checking submitted accounts. What a shower!

Oct 2, 2010 at 10:08 PM | Unregistered CommenterCumbrian Lad

I would be interesting to see where the Charities Commission have their pension funds invested.

Oct 3, 2010 at 12:10 AM | Unregistered CommenterAnoneumouse

Looks like the charity commission join the long list of British institutions modeled after the Keystone Kops.

Meanwhile, ouch: Fred Pearce says "Sorry, Patchy, but time is up."

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1317160/In-the-planet-Patchy-Acclaimed-science-writer-Fred-Pearce-calls-head-bungling-climate-change-boss.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

Perhaps Richard Curtis could do a short film, where journalists are vaporized by the unfairly criticized IPCC chairman?

If Pachauri is forced out - I hope that Gavin Schmidt will get the call as a replacement. Gavin is an accomplished diplomat, a patient educator, and has impeccable scientific credentials. Bob Ward would be a decent candidate too.

Oct 3, 2010 at 12:50 AM | Unregistered CommenterZT

Quango Queen Suzi is too busy making life difficult for small private schools to concern herself with a right-on eco 'charity' like Teri-Europe.

Oct 3, 2010 at 1:15 AM | Unregistered CommenterDaveS

The TERI-Europe accounts are not coming out into the open for a simple reason?

This is from a Times of India report in February (here)


Times of India:One of these papers also wrote about the problems of finances of TERI in UK.
Pachauri: Absolute nonsense. For the synthesis report of IPCC I had to set up a technical support unit as is done each time. I had one single employee and a part time person. The developed countries that mostly house these units, their governments normally fund the units. In my case I couldn't go to the (Indian) government and ask for funding. The UK government fortunately decided to fund it. They found it convenient to fund TERI Europe and then TERI Europe then contracted us to fund the salary of the person who was my right hand to write the report.

So it was clear, even to Pachauri, that to go up to the Indian Government ask for money to make the synthesis report, - would be a problem. Why indeed would that be? After all, the Indian government was already funding the IPCC Chair position through the Ministry of Environment and Forestry. One government is good as any other.

It was because it would appear as though he was using his position as IPCC chair to conduct projects, utilizing the services of his own company.

But how did TERI become involved in the production of the IPCC synthesis report at all?

These are comments from the New Zealand Government about the need for a Synthesis report (here Page 13-14)


"We agree with the Chair’s observation that preparation of the SYR will require considerable technical support, including for the management of the review process, editing and layout of the report, and welcome the Chair’s offer to provide support for this process from his office."

So TERI got involved in making the IPCC report because Pachauri volunteered its help himself.

Oct 3, 2010 at 4:04 AM | Unregistered CommenterShub

Thanks, ZT, for the link to Fred Pearce's article in the Mail Online: "In the name of the planet, Pachy must go".

Doesn't seem like Fred's normal style. Could he really have written: "My blood ran as cold as any glacier"? It's probably nothing. I probably shouldn't have read "The Ghost" by Robert Harris, a thriller about a ghostwriter, when I was on holiday last week.

(Mind you, whilst on holiday I got round to reading "The Hockey Stick Illusion" at last, by what's-his-name. Fascinating book. Chapter 15: "The meaning of the Hockey Stick" was especially thought provoking. Personally, though, I thought the book should have finished with this chapter - the following final 2 chapters, including the one about Climategate, seemed as if they'd just been tacked on as an afterthought).

Oct 3, 2010 at 9:10 AM | Unregistered CommenterPaul Boyce

Thank you ZT. Despite listing all the errors (deliberate) of the IPCC and the ccorruption revealed by Climategate, Fred Pearce stiil is "one who happens to believe that man-made climate change is virtually beyond doubt". Those are his own words. Fred Pearce is just another believer in the AGW religion.

Paul Boyce. I too thought Chapter 15 was the most instructive part of the HSI.

Oct 3, 2010 at 9:19 AM | Unregistered CommenterPhillip Bratby

Trouble behind, trouble ahead.
Patchy Jones, you'd better watch your speed.
==================

Oct 3, 2010 at 9:41 AM | Unregistered Commenterkim

ZT

I agree Gavin Schmidt has impeccable credentials for the post of Chairman. But I fear you may be over promoting Bob Ward, I think he would be better placed as Gavin's Head of PR.

Dream Team!.

Oct 3, 2010 at 9:51 AM | Unregistered CommenterGreen Sand

Thanks for the Pearce link. Okay, Pearce is an avowed warmist, but nonetheless, he does appear to be interested in reporting and not just spinning. I've yet to see a more damning indictment of AGW from a warmist; in the eyes of the faithful, he will be seen as a traitorous crypto-denier.

It doesn't so much matter what he personally believes, as long as he keeps articulating facts.

Oct 3, 2010 at 10:33 AM | Unregistered CommenterMichael larkin

Stop Press: re New PR Team for IPCC

I found this while browsing the internet for some CVs....

'We are pleased to announce that due to circumstances totally beyond their control a highly-experienced PR team has suddenly become free to take up a new assignement.

'Eugenie, Franny, Daniel, Lizzie and the others' most recent campaign (0 out of 10) caused a worldwide stir in climate change circles and projected their client onto the front pages of the MSM. They have deep insights into the psychology of the Green Movement and have justifiably occupied poistions as Thought Leaders, where their vision has recently become far better known to the general public.

With their high level contacts in film and production circles (Four Career Suicides and a Funeral) and in politics...they have browbeaten Ed Mountebank.. they woud be a fine addition to the IPCC...building on the spectacular successes it has enjoyed over the last two years'

Oct 3, 2010 at 10:36 AM | Unregistered CommenterLatimer Alder

It would be really interesting to get a list of who exactly saw this video BEFORE it was put online. Bearing in mind the money that the 10:10 campaign has received from a variety of illustrious sources, and the personal backing of Ed Milliband.

Lots of people are edging themselves away from the video, so it would be quite revealing to have a justification of the state of mind required from those who saw it and thought, “that's fine".
I don't think we can afford to have this disappear down the usual Warmist memory hole.

Would I be right in thinking that because they receive public money the production of this would be subject to a Freedom of information request? Or are they exempt because they are a charity?

Oct 3, 2010 at 12:15 PM | Unregistered CommenterStuck-record

Re Shub

But how did TERI become involved in the production of the IPCC synthesis report at all?

Who were TERI EU's trustees and now 'advisors'? You pays your money, you get the 'right' message printed. The iAC report mentioned formalising the position, setting up a dedicated, funded support unit in Delhi or Switzerland. Wonder who lobbied for Delhi?

But in Seoul, the IPCC has hired media consultants to ensure, edgy, dramatic coverage. Rajenda Pachauri, you are the weakest link Goodbye. Click.

Oct 3, 2010 at 12:33 PM | Unregistered CommenterAtomic Hairdryer

Re Stuck-record

Would I be right in thinking that because they receive public money the production of this would be subject to a Freedom of information request? Or are they exempt because they are a charity?

Amusingly they're incorporated as an ltd, and a registered charity. The registered address of 7th Floor, High Holborn is Olswang's office for the ltd, and Delancy Passage for the Trust. The legalese on their webpage seems to suggest most activities are being done by the ltd, not the charity though.

Oct 3, 2010 at 12:55 PM | Unregistered CommenterAtomic Hairdryer

Atomic Hairdryer

The legalese on their webpage seems to suggest most activities are being done by the ltd, not the charity though.

Interesting. Very Interesting. I think a IRS audit of both may prove very interesting for they may well be moving money back and forth between the two improperly.

Naturally, that will never happen because the are "doing the right thing" and are above the law.

Oct 3, 2010 at 2:36 PM | Unregistered CommenterDon Pablo de la Sierra

Sorry Bishop, off topic but...! BBC1 just showing the opening of the Commonwealth Games in New Delhi. Maldives team paraded on about 1523hrs and both BBC commentators stated that the Maldives are in danger from global warming.

I thought that this had been debunked so many times that no one could make that claim/statement with a straight and honest face.

Peter Walsh

Oct 3, 2010 at 3:29 PM | Unregistered CommenterRETEPHSLAW

@RETEPHSLAW

Sounds like this partiality may be worthy of a message to the address shown here: http://www.dcscience.net/?p=3486

(My climate prediction program tells me that you will get an auto-responder message in ten minutes - but probably your message will be read)

Whilst looking for the email address, I see that Neil Craig followed a similar path http://a-place-to-stand.blogspot.com/2010/09/science-reporting-on-bbc-your-chance-to.html with similar results.

Oct 3, 2010 at 4:00 PM | Unregistered CommenterZT

Stuck Record

Teri would be exempt from FoI because they are not a public body. Receiving public funds is not enough.

Oct 3, 2010 at 4:02 PM | Registered CommenterBishop Hill

Re Don Pablo

Naturally, that will never happen because the are "doing the right thing" and are above the law.

It could be a bit dubious and allow a mix of for-profit and not-for-profit activities to be blended. Downside is the UK's reporting requirements are slow for filings. Both ltd and charity(s) are newly incorporated, so it'll be a while before they have to file anything. If their income is low, the ltd may be able to file abbreviated accounts that don't show much useful information. Standard trick though is to buy consultancy from the ltd to justify moving cash around and launder the money from the 'charity' into the for-profit entities.

That's the one to watch with TERI as well. Money's funneled from subsidiaries back into the black hole of TERI in India. That's been doing some very lucrative biotech work and may be looking to spin out some of that into a for-profit entity, which given their Kuwait clean-up contract could be highly profitable. If Pachy ends up an exec or shareholder in that entity, he could look forward to a happy retirement. This is the bit KPMG glossed over and Monbiot ignored. Pachy's potential wealth is not in his cash transactions, it's in any equity he may have, and this is where the conflicts of interest should be apparent.

Oct 3, 2010 at 4:07 PM | Unregistered CommenterAtomic Hairdryer

ZT thanks. I have posted this on BBC complaints site. It is a bit rushed but it tells the message. I will follow up here with any reply I receive from the BEEB. They replied the last time I complained about comments at the Chelsea Flower Show by a reporter that bees were being wiped out by AGW and agreed, as is their wont, within limits, saying that what the reporter had said, wasn't what he meant!!!

1523hrs approx on Sun 03 Oct 2010, I was watching the opening Ceremony of the Commonwealth Games from New Delhi. As the Maldives team paraded on, both of your commentators made statements that the Maldives were in danger of sinking because of Global Warming. There is no evidence, scientific or otherwise, available which will confirm this and is yet another attempt by the BBc and it's employees to pervert the truth about alleged Anthropogenic Global Warming. In 2007, a Mr Stewart Dimmock took a court case against the UK Goverment relating to Political propaganda (Al Gore's movie An Inconvenient Truth) being shown illegally to schoolchildren. It is illegal to do this in the UK. Mr Dimmock won his case and also won substantial costs. Mr Dimmock presented 35 items which he wanted the judge to rule on. The Judge asked Mr Dimmock to reduce the number of items as he had not had enough time to consider all 35 and it was agreed that the judge would rule on 9 of them, the 1st nine in the list. Number 2 in this list was that Pacific Islands are drowning. The Maldives were included in this ruling. So 9 "errors" were declared by the judge.

So in view of this, how can you encourage your reporters or commentators to continue with the lie of AGW in relation to low lying islands being threatened when they are obviously not. Your answer please, and are you going to broadcast a retraction of these comments? I think I know the answer to that already.

Oct 3, 2010 at 4:12 PM | Unregistered CommenterRETEPHSLAW

Re the boss

Teri would be exempt from FoI because they are not a public body. Receiving public funds is not enough.

The reverse angle works though, so if the transactions can be identifed, then FOI requests can be submitted to the public body that gave them. I'm about to do this for 10:10 based on this story-

http://www.getreading.co.uk/news/s/2079365_council_renews_carbon_mission

Among the council projects completed and being developed include:

- Commitment to the 10:10 campaign which aims to encourage people, schools, organisations and businesses to cut their carbon use by 10 per cent a year

I can't FOI 10:10, but I can FOI the Council asking if there was any cash consideration paid to 10:10, and asking them if they're still happy supporting this organisation in light of their video nasty.

Oct 3, 2010 at 4:12 PM | Unregistered CommenterAtomic Hairdryer

Atomic Hairdryer

Pachy's potential wealth is not in his cash transactions, it's in any equity he may have, and this is where the conflicts of interest should be apparent.

It is difficult to follow the money trail, as you outline. I have dabbled in writing thriller novels and so spent considerable time researching the global banking system. Even with the "best technology" it is impossible to follow the individual's activities. I am sure Packy's money is very well hidden and not in Europe or the US. The best places for that is in the Arab Gulf states and Hong Kong, which he visits frequently. Wonder why?

As for 10:10, give them hell!

Oct 3, 2010 at 5:26 PM | Unregistered CommenterDon Pablo de la Sierra

Do you think anyone has told George Monbiot yet?
Or is he stuck in his tower, suurounded by 'gatekeepers', seeing, hearing no 'evil' AFFLICTED (Franny 10:10 Campaign's opinion of sceptics) sceptic siren voices... luring him to reality.

This is what he was asking for a little while ago...

Oct 3, 2010 at 6:50 PM | Unregistered CommenterBarry Woods

Re Don Pablo

Even with the "best technology" it is impossible to follow the individual's activities. I am sure Packy's money is very well hidden and not in Europe or the US. The best places for that is in the Arab Gulf states and Hong Kong, which he visits frequently. Wonder why?

Given anti-terror and anti-money laundering legislation, following the money is getting easier. Still takes a lot of effort though, if people are trying to hide it. Unravelling Enron gave some great examples of forensic accounting with a very large diagram showing how all the entities were related and the money flowed. So for state agencies, it's more doable. For outsiders like us, it's trickier and we're limited by the information available. India has some online filings for companies and charities, but I've not been able to find anything for TERI. Some of it's systems require registration though, and that's only open to Indian accountants it seems.

Personally I doubt Pachy's money or assets are hidden, they've just not been revealed. He doesn't really have any need to hide them whilst the IPCC has no COI policy. The only people he may need to hide from at the moment are the Charities Commission and India's tax authorities, if some of his expenses don't qualify.

(given I need a job at the moment, doing this kind of thing could be fun, but guessing I'd need an accounting or legal qualification)

Oct 3, 2010 at 7:35 PM | Unregistered CommenterAtomic Hairdryer

Following up on RETEPHSLAW's post:

The Maldives country profile (BBC news site) : "None of the coral islands measures more than 1.8 metres (six feet) above sea level, making the country vulnerable to a rise in sea levels associated with global warming." http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/country_profiles/1166511.stm

Why the Maldives aren't sinking
http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/5595813/why-the-maldives-arent-sinking.thtml

Oct 3, 2010 at 8:34 PM | Unregistered Commentermatthu

Matthu,

Thanks, great information. When the BBC replies to me, and I have every faith that they will, I will use these references to (try to) ensure that they retract...ha ha, as if they will.

Are you reading this..BBC?

Peter Walsh

Oct 3, 2010 at 9:25 PM | Unregistered CommenterRETEPHSLAW

Peter Walsh
Maldives team paraded on about 1523hrs and both BBC commentators stated that the Maldives are in danger from global warming.

I thought that this had been debunked so many times that no one could make that claim/statement with a straight and honest face.

-------------------------------------------------------

I didn't see this but I suspect that they were sports commentators with no knowledge of AGW beyond the man on the top of the Clapham omnibus. i.e. little to nothing beyond what has been pumped out by the media over the years. Of course they have had hundreds of opportunities to hear/read that the Maldives are sinking - most of which, of course, they didn't hear or read. They have hardly any opportunities to read/hear the argument that they aren't sinking. Most of the debunking has gone on on sites like this or WUWT or CA. None of which they probably read.

I agree that it's incredibly frustrating but unless the BBC actually sent round a memo to tell their presenters in all fields - from sports to antiques, arts to gardening - to stop blurting out nonsense they really know nothing about in a desperate attempt to fill air time, then it's going to keep happening.

There are other fields which I know something about where they are just as frustratingly ignorant - but at least in most circumstances they aren't doing quite as much immediate damage.

Oct 4, 2010 at 12:33 AM | Unregistered Commenterartwest

artwest

That may be true - but it does not explain why the BBC news site also perpetuates the same myth on its Country profile page about the Maldives.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/country_profiles/1166511.stm

Oct 4, 2010 at 10:53 AM | Unregistered Commentermatthu

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>