Following up my earlier post on the "mismanagement" of donation funds by certain crooked individuals, here's an article by R. Nadeswaran, who is a regular columnist for The Sun newspaper under the Citizen Nades column regarding some... unethical practices of some so-called "do gooders" in regards to the management of donation funds, or lack of it. As he doesn't name names in regards to the Malaysian context, we can speculate that the cuprits must be very rich, and very influential indeed.
Original Article
'Professional' do-gooders must declare their perks
WHEN the saga unfolded in court last week, Singaporeans were not the only ones astounded by revelations of the lavish perks enjoyed by the head of the Singapore Kidney Foundation.
T. T. Durai, who has since resigned, flew first class, drew an annual salary of RM1.3 million and enjoyed annual bonus payments of between 10-12 months' pay.
With that kind of perks, everyone who contributes to a "worthy cause" has every reason to feel betrayed and let down.
Closer to home, the stories of high-salaries, jet-setting and first-class entertainment enjoyed by a privileged few who go by all sorts of names and titles have been subject of the rumour mill.
One day, he is a "consumer advocate". The next day, he is on the boards of 10 government and quasi-government agencies and draws six-figure allowances a month, sometimes more.
One day, he is a "social activist" campaigning for a "better quality of life for the community."
The next day, he becomes a capitalist sitting on the board of public listed companies, and yet keeps on sending statements in the name of Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) of which he has managed to get into.
One day, she is a welfare worker, looking into the plight of the down-trodden and the sickly. The next day, she is driven around in a luxury car. Many do-gooders are in circulation for their own interests.
What they earn in the form of salaries and allowances is a secret.
One day, he is an editor. On another day, he is flying to tragedy-struck areas as a member of an NGO - travels first class, stays in five-star hotels, gets a per diem allowance, but far away from where the action is.
He is on a "fact-finding mission. His expenses are borne by the NGO, but where does the money come from?
Annual accounts of NGOs and so-called charitable organisations, if they are made public, lump the remunerations of these officials with those of clerks, drivers and other minor staff.
They are classified as "Salaries and allowances for staff " and no one knows the identities of those who are enjoying better perks than Durai.
So, how much does the ringgit you give for a "good cause" actually end up with the people who deserve it? How much can be used as "administrative" costs?
There are hard and fast rules, but if the chief of a welfare organisation pays himself or herself seven figure annual salaries, who questions such actions?
In this column last year, I raised what was said at a seminar on transparency. Could someone tell us how much the Human Rights Commissioners (who work part-time) are paid and how much allowances they claim and the perks they enjoy. The silence has been deafening.
They go on a country-wide tour extolling the virtues of rights of individuals, but they stop short of telling us that as taxpayers, we have a right to know how they are spending our hard-earned money.
It does not stop at just this group of people.
There are hundreds who work in such organisations, co-operative societies and trade unions. And yet, there is no disclosure.
Before anyone points a finger, let me declare that when I completed my one-year term as the chairman of an inhouse co-operative in 1990, members at the annual general meeting approved an honorarium for the services rendered, of RM2,000, which worked out to RM166.66 a month.
*Abstract from The Sun article*
Copyright© 2004 Sun Media Corporation Sdn. Bhd. All rights reserved.
No comments:
Post a Comment