Was Lord Bell really paid £500,000 to keep the Maddie story front page news?

[G-Unit]

Ah yes, I remeber now.  Isn't she meant to be an accountant?

If she cant understand those accounts maybe she needs to find another job 

Perhaps you can explain them to us then? You did say it's easy earlier.

[Jean-Pierre]

Perhaps you can explain them to us then? You did say it's easy earlier.

Happy to have a go.

Which years accounts and what exactly do you want to know?

[Miss Taken Identity]

Happy to have a go.

Which years accounts and what exactly do you want to know?

Oh Go on JP...ALL of them...;)

[G-Unit]

Happy to have a go.

Which years accounts and what exactly do you want to know?

Firstly, I would like to say that Enid O'Dowd is a Fellow Chartered Accountant (FCA), no 'suppose' there. Secondly, I don't want to know anything. The accounts contain the minimum information required by law.

Some people would like the accounts to contain more than the legal minimum, however. It would certainly make it easier in the present discussion for example if the accounts had a breakdown of expenditure showing more than just 'Merchandising and Campaign Costs' and 'Administrative Expenses'. I know that money from the fund was used in 2008 and 2009 for legal action in Portugal to ban Amaral's book because the Director's notes say so, but I don't know how much of the Merchandising and Campaign Costs that involved. I don't really care, but some people do and argue that the transparency and best practice promise has not been fulfilled.

[Brietta]

Firstly, I would like to say that Enid O'Dowd is a Fellow Chartered Accountant (FCA), no 'suppose' there. Secondly, I don't want to know anything. The accounts contain the minimum information required by law.

Some people would like the accounts to contain more than the legal minimum, however. It would certainly make it easier in the present discussion for example if the accounts had a breakdown of expenditure showing more than just 'Merchandising and Campaign Costs' and 'Administrative Expenses'. I know that money from the fund was used in 2008 and 2009 for legal action in Portugal to ban Amaral's book because the Director's notes say so, but I don't know how much of the Merchandising and Campaign Costs that involved. I don't really care, but some people do and argue that the transparency and best practice promise has not been fulfilled.

The accounts for the Find Madeleine Fund are published annually and meet legal requirements.

The Goncalo Amaral Fund publishes neither basic information about money in or money out.  There may be no legal requirement to publish information about these donations ... and why should I be surprised there doesn't appear to be a moral consideration either ... particularly each time another demand is made on peoples' charity to replenish them.

I can see now why African Princes are so wired into the internet.

[G-Unit]

The accounts for the Find Madeleine Fund are published annually and meet legal requirements.

The Goncalo Amaral Fund publishes neither basic information about money in or money out.  There may be no legal requirement to publish information about these donations ... and why should I be surprised there doesn't appear to be a moral consideration either ... particularly each time another demand is made on peoples' charity to replenish them.

I can see now why African Princes are so wired into the internet.

I was replying to Jean-Paul's offer to look at the Madeleine Fund's accounts, as he seemed to think he could analyse them better than Enid O'Dowd did. He also seemed to cast doubt on her qualifications so I provided them.. I said that the Madeleine Fund meets the legal requirements didn't I? I also said that some people think that best practice and transparency requires more than the legal minimum information. I think there is another thread discussing Amaral's Fund and what the African Prince scams have to do with anything I don't know (but I'm sure you will enlighten me).

[Brietta]

I was replying to Jean-Paul's offer to look at the Madeleine Fund's accounts, as he seemed to think he could analyse them better than Enid O'Dowd did. He also seemed to cast doubt on her qualifications so I provided them.. I said that the Madeleine Fund meets the legal requirements didn't I? I also said that some people think that best practice and transparency requires more than the legal minimum information. I think there is another thread discussing Amaral's Fund and what the African Prince scams have to do with anything I don't know (but I'm sure you will enlighten me).

Just as a matter of interest ... £500,000 being a considerable sum ... do you know if there is any mention of the date of payment and any record of payment.

I would imagine if the fund paid out that amount it would be mentioned, possibly Enid O'Dowd might have noticed it and made comment elsewhere.

[G-Unit]

Just as a matter of interest ... £500,000 being a considerable sum ... do you know if there is any mention of the date of payment and any record of payment.

I would imagine if the fund paid out that amount it would be mentioned, possibly Enid O'Dowd might have noticed it and made comment elsewhere.

No. Mostly the Fund expenditure mentions only two categories 'Merchandising and Campaign Costs' and 'Administrative Expenses'. Enid provides a list of known professionals hired by the Fund, but no mention of Bell Pottinger, only of Alex Woolfall, and his connection with Mark Warner is mentioned perhaps suggesting that they paid him?
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id405.html

[Brietta]

No. Mostly the Fund expenditure mentions only two categories 'Merchandising and Campaign Costs' and 'Administrative Expenses'. Enid provides a list of known professionals hired by the Fund, but no mention of Bell Pottinger, only of Alex Woolfall, and his connection with Mark Warner is mentioned perhaps suggesting that they paid him?
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id405.html

So nothing at all regarding a £500,000 payment ... which surely must have made quite a noticeable dent.

Which leads me to conclude that I would prefer external verification of Lord Bell's remark.

[faithlilly]

So nothing at all regarding a £500,000 payment ... which surely must have made quite a noticeable dent.

Which leads me to conclude that I would prefer external verification of Lord Bell's remark.

Why would Lord Bell lie ? Who would claim to have been paid half a million pounds with the tax implications that would bring if he hadn't actually been paid that ?

[jassi]

Why would Lord Bell lie ? Who would claim to have been paid half a million pounds with the tax implications that would bring if he hadn't actually been paid that ?

Don't you know that everybody except the McCanns lie, even when they have no reason to.

[G-Unit]

So nothing at all regarding a £500,000 payment ... which surely must have made quite a noticeable dent.

Which leads me to conclude that I would prefer external verification of Lord Bell's remark.

Well, neither he nor the McCanns have denied it as far as I know. Also, the McCanns were being helped by others so one of them may have paid Bell Pottinger for it's services, who knows? Anyway, the expenditure on 'Merchandising and Campaign Costs' is as follows;

2007/08  £ 673,366   2008/09   £ 974,786    2009/10  £ 421,236  2010/11   £ 487,193   2011/12   £ 476,813  2012/13   £115,109   2013/14   £ 63,638

A more detailed breakdown was provided in 2007/2008 and in 2013/14 only. The link shows the breakdown for 2013/14 if you care to look - page 11;
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/FUND_2014.htm

[Alice Purjorick]

Just as a matter of interest ... £500,000 being a considerable sum ... do you know if there is any mention of the date of payment and any record of payment.

I would imagine if the fund paid out that amount it would be mentioned, possibly Enid O'Dowd might have noticed it and made comment elsewhere.

Why?
For all anyone knows from what is in the public domain it may be included in the 975 grand "Merchandising and Campaign Costs" in fy 2008/9 or part of it may be the vaguely identified 250 grand in fy 2007/2008.
As you believe the accounts are so transparent tell us how much was spent on Merchandising?

[Eleanor]

If this is even true, can anyone tell me why The McCanns shouldn't have done this?

[Brietta]

If this is even true, can anyone tell me why The McCanns shouldn't have done this?

I think it was a legitimate use of funds ... if it were true  (while Madeleine's parents had a worse press than the Wests, it was bound to adversely impact on their campaign on her behalf) ... but I have seen nothing which substantiates it.