I have looked to find how I can donate to help the Queensland floods.
Sure not the same tragedy as Victoria but we do want to help surely.
The idea grew after years of selling raffle tickets to help the family's of dead injured or sick construction workers, and family's.
What if we had just one place to donate? a community chest run by some one we could trust, given percentages to each charity and a separate fund for disasters?
In the work related system if one in two unionists gave $2 a week, one million times two every week?
I would willingly give weekly to such a collection, think of the money we could have right now if only one in four Australians gave $2 every week

Belly, whilst I applaud your sentiment, I see the problem as being this:

we already have Red Cross and organisations like St Vinnies, Salvos, Brotherhood of St Lawrence and a full cast of a thousand others, all able and willing to accept your generosity.

Problem - I recall the Bali bombings and how the Red Cross subverted funds from the intended beneficaries into programs of their choice.

Even with the best will in the world, I see no new organisation being able to resist similar conflicts when "public generosity" does not conform to "private agendas".

I actualy agree with you here Col Rouge, but we can find answers if we look
America, or parts of it once had such a thing.
My first thoughts came as a result of selling those raffle tickets for workers or their family's.
The ACTU,or union could run it, even the boss in bigger jobs.
But clearly we would need rules.
Accountability, tight controls, no over head costs, or pegged.
Yes not just the red cross commits such acts, one much loved charity dumps furniture, and hoards children's toys so the next bike ride for kids will not see them.
Given the problems the end result must be worth it.
All registered Charity's would be beneficiary's, given percentages published.
I think we could get 1 million regular donors and that $2 a week would be conservative, thats a lot of money over a year.
Who would run it?
not one charity, not fee for service provider, no government unless accountability was open.
I would think a committee Church's lawyers some from every place but open .
Given a chance we could make a real difference at such times.

Belly,

I used to work for a charity where donations were all we had... I was one of the 2 paid people, the rest were all volunteers...

So there were 2 mediocre wages going out per week... Even though were with in our rights, we wouldn't have dreamed of billing our expenses, No-one ever expected the charity to pay for a lunch.. bla bla.. yanno dedicated...

I found the best way to get money to the actual people who the charity was for, was to give it to the individual directly. Which is what I do when I donate to this cause.

A lot of $ got wasted, even in a very genuine charity such as this one, on stamps, printing, website, magazines.. for hundreds of members... all coming to thousands... Just all sorts of sundry crap...

So if you know someone, who knows someone cousins friend what ever... etc.. I'd send it that way...

Well yes but your donation has not got the potential to do so much.
If 20% of us, say 2 million gave that $2 every week.
4 million a week.
If we trust Charity's , give to them without any accounting of how it is used surely we could make this fool proof?
And in truth we would in the first year get many more than that number to donate, if it was trusted.
And some would give much more.
What if we had such a scheme in place now?
We face floods and fires, real pain real need must be worth considering.

Not a bad idea Belly.

A government fund or community chest could be chartered to direct all donations only to the cause the donor specifies.

Col, I personally don't have a problem with the Red Cross or similar groups diverting any extra donations to other worthy causes but not all may feel this way. I would only feel comfortable for funds to be redirected if the donations have gone over what is necessary to provide all the help required in those affected areas rather than a 'rob peter to pay paul' scenario.

Some of these groups also receive government funding to assist with administration costs.