Working for the last year in Irish development sector I have been following Irish goals, commitments, and achievements. As in every other part of the world, it is considered here that the best way of dealing with any charity problem (and snags do happen; we’re human beings after all), it is to do it first internally, in an honorable manner, and between the members of the board of the organization before anything would be made public. Let’s face it – if you are at all responsible, you will understand that bad press doesn’t necessarily enhance charity’s image and it will have a huge impact on donors in general. Moreover, if you have some common sense, you won’t be eager to feature as yet another character in a  ‘Lord’s of Poverty’ kind-of novel, will you?

This is exactly why I found the case of Irish Red Cross of utmost importance and decided to post on it. Recently the Irish Red Cross has taken to court Google Ireland Ltd. and, consequently, Google Inc., California, USA also. The action was taken to identify an anonymous, nasty blogger who spilled the beans and kept on posting about the organisations most inconvenient truths affecting (after Irish Red Cross) the employee’s “morale, fundraising and the day-to-day running of the organisation”. Google, quite understandably, didn’t want to reveal the blogger’s identity, nor did UPC Communications Ireland Ltd who probably simply couldn’t help in the matter.

What did the blogger write? Well, to save some few hours of your precious time going through the mumbo jumbo of  the lengthy original blog posts, I will try to put the blogger’s postulates into four main points, which are:  

1. A ROBUST INVOLVEMENT OF THE GOVERNMENT IN THE DEFINITION AND COMPOSITION OF THE BOARD* AND THE CENTRAL EXECUTIVE 

1A. “Appointment of a suitably qualified and experienced individual to the position of Chairperson of the Irish Red Cross to replace Mr. David Andrews who resigned in December 2009”(sorted);

1B. “Executive Committee members has existed for nearly two decades.  Real change will only take place when the two or three Board members who control the organisation with an iron fist are removed from office and when a sufficiently experienced and respected Secretary General is appointed”)  

2. HIRING INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATORS TO OVERSEE THE MANAGEMENT OF THE ORGANISATION

3. ENSURING THE ORGANISATION’S FINANCIAL VIABILITY

3A.“Launching an immediate internal investigation into the issue of the Tipperary Bank Account and the actions of the current Acting Chairman concerning this matter (…) On 26th December 2004 a massive earthquake struck off the coast of Indonesia which caused a tsunami that led to the death of nearly a quarter of a million people. The Irish Red Cross immediately launched an appeal and an unprecedented response from the Irish public followed. Over €30 million was raised. (…) As reported in the November edition of the Village Magazine not all of this money was declared and handed over to the Irish Red Cross head office in Dublin, as should have happened.” It is said the undeclared bank account is for over €150,000)

3B. “Despite the obvious success of the Fundraising Department in raising over €1 million for the Flood Appeal this blog understands that not a penny has been disbursed to those who suffered as a result of the flooding, nearly two months after the crisis.”  

4. REVISING OF THE EXPENDITURE ON THE  “QUESTIONABLE” CONSULTANCY FEES (“in 2008 over €300,000 was paid in Consultant/Professional Fees and in 2009 another €300,000 was again paid in Consultant/Professional Fees. In particular it is known that one specific consultant was paid over €150,000 in 2008 and over €160,000 in 2009”) more here and here:

The blogger referred to the situation as “an internal crisis” and stated that “the 6,000 Irish Red Cross members and staff crying out for change”. All the concerns  expressed sounded to me to be quite genuine.

Being an Irish Taxpayer, I do mind where my money goes especially because the Irish Ministry of Defence provides the Irish Red Cross Society with a grant-in-aid of almost €1 million annually. This is in addition to supplying one of their buildings free of charge.

Soon, the allegations were made public and a flow of negative press coverage and adverse publicity followed. The government had no choice but to hold a meeting (you can have an insight into what has been said here and here).

You would hope that Irish Red Cross would release a statement on their website and refer itself to the much adverse publicity, however none such movement was noticed. So what action did the IRC eventually decided to take? Well, … they decided to pursue and silence the naughty blogger.

You may argue, and say (like some of the IRC staff members) that the blogger may have posted “inaccurate and damaging material”. Indeed, one of the commentators on the blog states: “While your commitment to much needed reform is admirable, publishing information discussed in confidence and good faith in the course of union meetings and private conversations is far more likely to contribute to the atmosphere of fear, intimidation and mistrust than alleviate it. In fact it is likely to breed distrust between colleagues and so seems short sighted and counter-productive.”

On the other hand however, we can find other members of IRC stating: ‘the credibility of the Irish Red Cross is suffering on a number of fronts. We have two or three people on our Board who have controlled the organisation for twenty years, and who, despite best governance practice, refuse to step aside. Many members throughout the country are ashamed that the Irish Red Cross is now chaired by someone who failed to declare an organisational bank account for four years until it was discovered during an internal audit. On top of all that we have an Acting Secretary General that was appointed without any recruitment process, with no vacancy advertisement and no interview (...) It distresses so many of us that the Irish Red Cross has been reduced to this level and something must be done and done soon to reverse it’.

Dear Th!nkers, as long as we don’t know the truth, I don't think it is fair to blame any of the sides. However, there are definitely questions worth asking:  

Is chasing the blogger the way to go?

Is revealing a charity’s uncomfortable truth a good way of bringing transparency and establishing a better governance structure?

What do you Th!nk?

*According to the 1938 Act the Minister is entitled to nominate and the president appoint the chairman of the organisation

Credits: http://governancereformatirishredcross.blogspot.com/