Does the Madeleine Fund have a moral obligation to transparency?

[G-Unit]

The information supplied by the above company has been criticised because of it's lack of detail and clarity. There is no legal obligation for the company to provide more information than it does. Is there a moral obligation for it to do so?

43

[mercury]

of cousrse especially after likening it to a charity with transparency rules  they have to abide by

[faithlilly]

of cousrse especially after likening it to a charity with transparency rules  they have to abide by

Agreed.

[stephen25000]

Promises, promises.

Now what were they be in the beginning ?

[Alice Purjorick]

The information supplied by the above company has been criticised because of it's lack of detail and clarity. There is no legal obligation for the company to provide more information than it does. Is there a moral obligation for it to do so?

I am not so concerned about the morality issue.
I find it strange that it should be proclaimed as a organisation whose financial dealings will be/are transparent, when they patently are not. Several posters on here insist they are but that view point is at variance with the information available from Companies House, the whole bloody lot being available from C H for all to see.
Work that out for yourselves  or to write it on a sign and bash you over the head with it: "who would you rather believe, Companies House or a self proclaimed expert on here"?

[G-Unit]

I am not so concerned about the morality issue.
I find it strange that it should be proclaimed as a organisation whose financial dealings will be/are transparent, when they patently are not. Several posters on here insist they are but that view point is at variance with the information available from Companies House, the whole bloody lot being available from C H for all to see.
Work that out for yourselves  or to write it on a sign and bash you over the head with it: "who would you rather believe, Companies House or a self proclaimed expert on here"?

The 'morality' question arises when you compare the information available and the 'transparency' offered. I suppose it all depends on your definition of transparency? None of the below synonyms describe the published accounts in my opinion;

synonyms:   obvious, explicit, unambiguous, unequivocal, clear, lucid, straightforward, plain, (as) plain as the nose on your face, apparent, unmistakable, manifest, conspicuous, patent, indisputable, self-evident;

[Alfred R Jones]

The 'morality' question arises when you compare the information available and the 'transparency' offered. I suppose it all depends on your definition of transparency? None of the below synonyms describe the published accounts in my opinion;

synonyms:   obvious, explicit, unambiguous, unequivocal, clear, lucid, straightforward, plain, (as) plain as the nose on your face, apparent, unmistakable, manifest, conspicuous, patent, indisputable, self-evident;

What is immoral about the alleged lack of transparency as you see it?

[G-Unit]

What is immoral about the alleged lack of transparency as you see it?

It's not alleged Alfred, it's patently obvious. This is what the findmadeleine website says;

An experienced Fund Administrator has been appointed to ensure the highest standards of transparency and accountability.
http://www.findmadeleine.com/about_us/madeleines-fund.html

As the company has no employees, who, in the first instance is the experienced fund administrator who was appointed? No-one has ever been able to find out.

What are high standards of transparency and accountability?

Does that mean being transparent and accountable for how people's donated money was spent? If not, what else there was to be transparent about?  If you look at the accounts it's impossible to discover how much was spent on what, except in very broad terms.

Few moral judgments are more intuitively obvious and more widely shared than that promises ought to be kept.
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/promises/

[Alice Purjorick]

The 'morality' question arises when you compare the information available and the 'transparency' offered. I suppose it all depends on your definition of transparency? None of the below synonyms describe the published accounts in my opinion;

synonyms:   obvious, explicit, unambiguous, unequivocal, clear, lucid, straightforward, plain, (as) plain as the nose on your face, apparent, unmistakable, manifest, conspicuous, patent, indisputable, self-evident;

The way I see it is "what is the reason for not putting your money where your mouth is". i.e if one says one is going to do something why not do it?. To not do so leads to the thought that the original suggestion was merely a hollow "beau geste".
To then hide behind the old "RTFSPS" lark is a bit naff.

[insider]

The information supplied by the above company has been criticised because of it's lack of detail and clarity. There is no legal obligation for the company to provide more information than it does. Is there a moral obligation for it to do so?

This is nothing unique to the McCanns.  Time and time again we see events occur and the public is asked to help out even donating cash to the cause.  Promises are made in the opening days in an attempt to garner favour but with the passage of time those promises are conveniently forgotten.  The McCanns promised absolute transparency with their missing daughters Fund but it was soon cloaked under the canopy of a Limited Company which under normal reporting rules in the UK has to reveal very little detail.  I for one want to know who was paid out of that Fund for what reason and when.

[sadie]

This is nothing unique to the McCanns.  Time and time again we see events occur and the public is asked to help out even donating cash to the cause.  Promises are made in the opening days in an attempt to garner favour but with the passage of time those promises are conveniently forgotten.  The McCanns promised absolute transparency with their missing daughters Fund but it was soon cloaked under the canopy of a Limited Company which under normal reporting rules in the UK has to reveal very little detail.  I for one want to know who was paid out of that Fund for what reason and when.

If it bothers you that much, why dont you write to them, insider?


I have given to many charities, but never demanded to know how every penny is spent.

The ball is in your court if it worries YOU that much.

[insider]

If it bothers you that much, why dont you write to them, insider?


I have given to many charities, but never demanded to know how every penny is spent.

The ball is in your court if it worries YOU that much.

I gave up emailing them because they don't reply.

[G-Unit]

This is nothing unique to the McCanns.  Time and time again we see events occur and the public is asked to help out even donating cash to the cause.  Promises are made in the opening days in an attempt to garner favour but with the passage of time those promises are conveniently forgotten.  The McCanns promised absolute transparency with their missing daughters Fund but it was soon cloaked under the canopy of a Limited Company which under normal reporting rules in the UK has to reveal very little detail.  I for one want to know who was paid out of that Fund for what reason and when.

The problem is that even if the fund had been registered as a charity not much more detail would have to have been revealed. I examined the accounts of 'Missing People' and was not able to get a clear picture of their activities. The only way we would get a true picture is if we saw the basic accounts before things were grouped under broad headings for reporting purposes.

[Alfred R Jones]

It's not alleged Alfred, it's patently obvious. This is what the findmadeleine website says;

An experienced Fund Administrator has been appointed to ensure the highest standards of transparency and accountability.
http://www.findmadeleine.com/about_us/madeleines-fund.html

As the company has no employees, who, in the first instance is the experienced fund administrator who was appointed? No-one has ever been able to find out.

What are high standards of transparency and accountability?

Does that mean being transparent and accountable for how people's donated money was spent? If not, what else there was to be transparent about?  If you look at the accounts it's impossible to discover how much was spent on what, except in very broad terms.

Few moral judgments are more intuitively obvious and more widely shared than that promises ought to be kept.
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/promises/

does the fund have share holders?   What ever gave you the impression that the directors of the Fund meant it had to be transparent and accountable to YOU? 

[G-Unit]

I gave up emailing them because they don't reply.

You're not alone, many have asked and been ignored. The only reply forthcoming is that the accounts are available of the Companies House website, which is true, but they don't tell you anything. If you ask who the Fund Manager was/is  they don't answer.