Thursday, 3 December 2020
A recent social media post by them extolls the virtue of 'member -driven' charities, this raised a few laughs at the RNID etc who preferred sacking them if they sign, or just letting them sweep the floors of the office while preferring to court celebs and politicians instead who have hard of hearing relatives. One wonders if this venture really examined how effective deaf member-driven charities actually are?
E.G. The ELS, where 100s of deaf lost their support, and 70 staff lost their jobs because of an inability to manage their finances. Maybe the ultimate in member-driven deaf charities? like the British Deaf Association (The BDA), whose criteria and rules would put Hitler to shame regarding who is or isn't deaf or who signs correctly and doesn't, who last year stood by as an exodus of ALL their trustees took place with allegations of bullying by the executive?
Unfazed they admitted a new batch who know when to keep their mouths shut and oversee threats to members of court action if they dare reveal how decisions are made there. Perhaps member-driven in deaf terms means exclusion except to those they approve of, which is what Cause four was saying it is against, oops, not done your homework have you...
If cause four published a blacklist of deaf charities that don't enable and they won't raise funds for, it would have more going for it, but I suspect profit, not democracy is the aim of it all.