A good find, Charles, and as clear an illustration of Sue Gardner's mindset and agenda as has been expressed anywhere.
"In 2010, 12 chapters acted as payments processors for the annual fundraising campaign in their geography." - how many of those have survived now? When you find ten victims all shot in the foot, you start to suspect that there's a single gunman.
"Residents of France, Germany and the UK give 10 times as much money to charity overall as do residents of Finland, Austria and Portugal: should those chapters therefore be 10x wealthier?" Only Sue Gardner has leapt to the conclusion that Chapters will retain income in proportion to the donations. Everybody else who's actually gone through the FDC process knows that the income from donations distributed via the FDC depends very strongly on the proposals made for expenditure - and believe me, I know a bit about that process. Was Sue Gardner unaware of how the FDC works, or was this simply a convenient strawman that she set up to justify her actions? WMUK has never, to my knowledge, asked for a percentage of the donations raised in the UK. It has only ever asked for income to meet its programmed and agreed expenditure.
There has been no movement in Sue Gardner's anti-chapter position for the past three years. In 2012 I challenged Gardner to outline the steps needed for WMUK to take in order to have fund-processing restored, and she ignored the question. At the time, I said that no matter what WMUK did to address the concerns that were being raised, there would be no return of fund processing, because that was the sole item on her agenda. Those so-called concerns were just an excuse to remove fund-processing and I'm sorry to have been proven right on each count.
--
Rexx