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.

We are not getting interest here, and frankly I have not got the support in the workplace.
I think it is worth while, in the workplace we are always raising money, for sometimes tragic events.
workers wife with cancer you name it, that two bucks could give instant help, big help, in such cases raffles rarely do.
Those who work with me give to rescue helicopters,support white ribbon day, violence against women, breast cancer, soon mens prostrate cancer all from our own money.
I would gladly double that, put an equal amount into a community chest, if it was rort proof.
And still find money for things like floods and fires, we may do well to formalize what takes place with our charity donations
One big hearted workplace has with the bosses help put a system in place.
If a worker or family is in trouble one key hit is all it takes every worker enrolled in the system gives ten bucks that pay near nine thousand dollars, proud of those blokes.

Pelican "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 do not feel the same as you Pelican.

Froa charity to tout for donations under the guise of providing support to a particualr cause but using it for a completely different cause purpose is called

"Fraud by deception" and is a criminal offense

It is no different to an entreprenuer canvassing investors to support his business promotion, then running off with the money.

I have, no direct problem with Red Cross, I think they and many charities do stirling work to the benefit of those who find themselves accutely or even chronically disadvantaged.

But we rely on their standards of honesty and ethicacy and when they diverted funds away from the promoted cause of relief of Bali bombing victims, they fell below the minimal acceptable standards of ethicacy and honesty.

If someone wants to benefit from my philanthropy, then I have a reasonable and legal right to be told

How the money will be spent

What portion will be absorbed in "administration cost"

How they have spent monies in previous years

If I feel the "Admin Costs" are too high, I can choose to be philantropic through another avenue

If I feel the goals of the charity are incompatible with my own, (for instance I would have huge personal problems supporting any "charity" which was in league with a religion which rabidly pursued an anti-abortion agenda, for fear my contributions might get diverted into funding the "anti-abortion" cause), I can choose to contribute to an alternate charity.

Regarding government funding, I am not certain about the reporting requirements for a charity as prescribed by the charities commissioners but I would guess they are requried to disclose revenue by channel and government money would represent a "channel"

Hi Belly,
I've only just found this ongoing discussion, so apologies for the lateness of my thoughts.
I am one of two administrators for the Whitehorse Community Chest in Victoria. For 47 years we have been providing aid to the charities and welfare agencies in the City of Whitehorse. We assist approx. 60 charities/welfare agencies per year, and last year allocated $150,000. The amount each 'beneficiary' is allocated depends on how many collector they can provide for our annual doorknock. We also fundraise in others ways, the moneys also being allocated.
I wanted to reassure you that our Chest's finances are transparent. Certainly we have expenses. My colleague and I are paid, but the roles we are employed in cannot be done by volunteers. I work two days a week coordinating the volunteers, organising printing, recruiting new members and list goes on.
This Community Chest is a wonderful institution - our only problem is getting volunteers to doorknock, as many of our members are now too old to be out doorknocking.
We are just moving into the 21st century getting email and internet, and so do not have a web address at this time. I would be happy however to show you how we operate and where the money goes.
Keep thinking along this line Belly - it works! (and some of our Beneficiaries include the Red Cross, St Vincents and Oxfam. We have churches involved, but they must provide proof that they do not use their allocated funds for their ministries)

I am truly grateful for your post, yours is the type of thing I was thinking of.
In matters like the westpak helicopter workers put weekly donations in.
But if we had a central point to donate?
To distribute?
I know many would get payroll deduction forms out in seconds.
The thread did not truly get of the ground, but the idea will one day.
We could see the right to direct your money and bigger separate donations in times like now.
America has these community chests, not every place but a few speeding motorists even pay fines this way.