Camila Batmanghelidjh to leave Kids Company, citing politicians' 'ugly games'

Campaigner says ‘I am being silenced’ over cuts in government funding for her charity that would leave traumatised children ‘largely unprotected’

One of Britain’s most high-profile children’s campaigners, Camila Batmanghelidjh, has launched a blistering attack on politicians and austerity, as she announced she is to step down after nearly 20 years at the head of the Kids Company charity.

The charity she founded, which specialises in therapeutic support for severely abused and traumatised children, is likely to halve in size, making £14m of cuts and sacking hundreds of staff in an attempt to survive a serious financial crisis.

On Thursday night, she said: “Some ugly games are being played. The facts are that the vulnerable children of this country remain largely unprotected. There’s no point in shooting the messenger if the message is uncomfortable. I am being silenced.”

Kids Company predicted that the proposed restructuring, which it said was triggered after the government signalled that it was to end £5m annual funding, will leave thousands of vulnerable youngsters without support.

The charity has been negotiating for weeks with the Cabinet Office over a one-off grant of around £3m to enable it to restructure. If the grant is unforthcoming, the charity could call in the receivers within weeks.

The charity has expanded rapidly in recent years to cope with what it says are huge rises in demand, particularly from troubled children who have been turned away from mainstream health, education and care services.

Kids Company’s HQ is currently in temporary accommodation located on an upper floor of an investment bank in the City of London. According to Batmanghelidjh, the charity “nearly went bust” recently but was given a temporary lifeline after well-known artists including Antony Gormley, Tracy Emin and Anish Kapoor donated works to raise money for it.

Batmanghelidjh warned that without a regular source of state funding, Kids Company would be reliant on fundraising: “We are doing the most serious work [funded] by cupcake sales and cocktail parties, and I don’t think that is right or sustainable.”

As a result, the charity would struggle to meet the needs of its children in future, she said: “We will be able to offer them food, hopefully, and at least give them the dignity of being a compassionate witness to their experience. But we are not going to able to sort out their problems because we do not have the resources.”

Batmanghelidjh, a trained psychotherapist, will step down as chief executive in the next few months but continue to carry out clinical work with Kids Company clients and act as the charity’s figurehead.

The prime minister David Cameron has been a prominent supporter of Batmangelidjh, but it is understood that the price of further government help was the departure of Batmagelidjh and the charity’s chairman, broadcaster Alan Yentob.

Kids Company believes its close relations with the government soured last Autumn, after its See The Child campaign criticised the UK’s child protection system as not fit for purpose. According to one source, Whitehall made it clear the campaign had failed to show the government “enough respect”.

The charity also believes it lost support from City donors after an article about it appeared earlier this year in the rightwing Spectator magazine, alleging that the charity was poorly managed and could not demonstrate the social impact of its work. The charity says it has independent audits to prove its effectiveness.

Three Kids Company directors quit earlier this year, amid what Batmanghelidjh said were “conditions of extreme stress” at the charity caused by funding difficulties.

In a wide-ranging interview with the Guardian, Batmanghelidjh warned that growing inequality was fuelling a distorted “emotional economy” for young people in the UK that would lead to riots and conflict between haves and have nots.

“At some point, the two shall meet and when you get a very violated individual meeting a very well-cared for individual, the violated individual’s rage will bring down the well-cared for individual. That’s what people haven’t understood yet.”

Although increasing numbers of children were suffering abuse, politicians had repeatedly shown they lacked the “moral fibre” to invest properly in child protection, she said.

“If when I look back on my 30 years of work with vulnerable children on the streets, what I would say is there is a lack of political leadership in relation to maltreated children and vulnerable children in this country,” she added. “Until there is genuine political leadership on this issue the system will remain failing.”

The prime minister David Cameron courted what he called the “visionary” Kids Company during his mission to detoxify the Tory party while in opposition, and cited it in his infamous “hug a hoodie” speech in 2006 as an exemplar of the type of public service he wanted to see – one which concentrated on “emotional quality” rather than hitting bureaucratic targets.

Batmanghelidjh was subsequently co-opted on to his ill-fated Big Society project in 2010. In 2012, Cameron personally intervened, like Gordon Brown five years before him, to ensure Kids Company continued to receive a government grant at a time when many other charities grants were cut.

But Batmanghelidgjh says Cameron lost his nerve in latter years: “He lacked courage. When they [the media] started spinning it into ‘hug a hoodie’ he needed to stand up for his belief and say to the nation: ‘I stand by what I said, because it really matters.’ This crystalises the whole issue, which is they [politicians] put their finger out and whichever way the wind blows that’s the way they blow.”

Iranian-born Batmanghelidjh founded Kids Company nearly 20 years ago. It provides care, support and education for around 36,000 highly vulnerable young people and adults in London, Bristol and Liverpool. Many have experienced sexual abuse, violence, addiction, mental illness and family instability.

The charity believes its intensive therapeutic model for working with maltreated youngsters should be adopted by mainstream children’s care services, but its high upfront costs and often unconventional approach has scared off many potential local authority funders.

Although Batmanghelidjh has attracted tens of millions from charity donors over the years, she said she had been worn down by the stress of having to constantly fundraise: “I have just got to a point now where I am saying: ‘I don’t play this game any more.’ The scale of what is arriving at our door is too profoundly disturbing for us to be able to address it through unpredictable morsels of funding. It is not just right.”

“If I went under a bus right now, Kids Company would not have any money, and I worry about that.”

For some years Kids Company has received a £5m annual government grant, equivalent to a fifth of its annual income. But Batmanghelidjh said ministers had cut the grant from 2015-16: “Consequently we will start the year not knowing where our money is coming from and that’s too high a risk to sustain when you have got disturbed children and young people.”

She criticised politicians for failing to prioritise investment in child protection: “I don’t accept that there is not enough money to do the job. There’s enough money for high-speed rail. There is enough money for arms. There is enough money for the glory of the Olympics. But there is just not enough money for child protection and that is wrong.”

The charity is well-known for its celebrity supporters and donors, which have included Coldplay, Damien Hirst, the comedian Michael McIntyre, JK Rowling and Emma Thompson. But more than half of its £23m income in 2013 came from central and local government and charitable trusts and foundations.

Kids Company’s last set of accounts lodged with the charities commission, for 2013, recorded a 23% increase in spending on front-line services as government funding cuts and the impact of the recession left children without support.

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/jul/03/camila-batmanghelidjh-to-leave-kids-company?CMP=share_btn_tw

The cut backs for children with bad problems, both with projects like this and mental health services for children within the NHS, is both short sighted and immoral. Help the child, you get an adult that will be a decent member of society. Leave the child to rot and you will get an adult who will bring down society.

This woman has made a lot of money over the years courtesy of the tax payer... either it's a charity or it is a tax payer funded quango...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2899873/The-charities-like-quangos-Taxpayer-funding-account-half-50-s-annual-income.html



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/9322949/Charities-getting-too-much-taxpayer-cash-says-think-tank.html

Looks like this "charity" has serious questions to answer about financial irregularities and the way it operates...



http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/07/03/uk-taxpayer-funded-kids-company-charity-leader-forced-to-stand-aside/


http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9437932/the-trouble-with-kids-company/

It's got no questions to answer, financially or otherwise.  Her leaving had already been planned, she has said over and over again she would leave after 30 years and had planned to leave, it's in the records.  Scummy Cameron who pretened he was concerned about children and used to consult her, because she dared to point out that without the backing that they used to get, Sure Start etc, vunerable children are even more vunerable now, started the rumour.

Alan Yentob, chairman of Kids Company's board of trustees and a BBC presenter and Director, said: "Camila Batmanghelidjh and the staff of Kids Company have created a highly effective model of care and support for the most vulnerable children in society which should be recognised and valued as a national asset.

"The board and I, with the backing of a philanthropic group have ensured that this is protected and that Kids Company will continue to offer safety, protection and loving care to some of society's most vulnerable children."

Ms Batmanghelidjh claimed that she was not standing down because of the crisis, but had intended to go anyway and said her departure was being used to distract from cuts in spending on children.

She told Sky News: "We have received 19 years of clear audits... so these allegations that the charity's poorly run are absolutely inaccurate.

"I think what's happened is I've repeatedly raised the alarm about child protection issues and because I've been vocal and challenged government I've just been a difficult person to have around and not compliant and I think they find that difficult to tolerate."

http://news.sky.com/story/1512816/childrens-campaigner-to-step-down-over-funding

She's bloody fantastic and there are many decent members of society out there that would not be in that position if she hadn't rescued them and worked with them as children.

She's a good ambassador for children and has done an awful lot as far as I am aware (coils never pronounce her surname)
It's a shame that a charity like this may face closure and/or financial ruin.
Sad sign of the times.

She was described as the 'Sepp Blatter' of London in one of those articles I posted...


And backed up by an establishment BBC talking head is not really a resounding endorsement either!

As I always say, for every story that says X, you'll find another that says Y

Sure start was a great scheme for mothers.

There are quotes and allegations from people who actually worked in the organisation...

Tommy Monk wrote:

There are quotes and allegations from people who actually worked in the organisation...

All I know is, when I worked within education, she was well-liked

Of course she would be by all the lefties there and The guardian where the op comes from, and The BBC.

Tommy Monk wrote:Of course she would be by all the lefties there and The guardian where the op comes from, and The BBC.

I don't know enough about what you're claiming to make a fair or reasoned argument Tommy to be fair. I'd have to read the links you've provided.

The main point I'm making is that too many so called 'charities' are just tax payer funded quangos who then behave overtly political.


Read the first two links about this.


Billions of tax money is given away every year to these types of 'charity' who spend most of the money received on big salaries for the chosen luvvies.

From a fairly reliable source, apparently she handed in a list of high profile MP and establishment paedophiles

Cameron didn't like this and released his dogs in the civil service and the media to discredit her.

Fuzzy Zack wrote:From a fairly reliable source, apparently she handed in a list of high profile MP and establishment paedophiles

Cameron didn't like this and released his dogs in the civil service and the media to discredit her.

Mmmm I did wonder if she had done something to fall from favour

That wouldn't surprise me in the least.   Cameron doesn't like the facts he called a 'conspiracy theory' coming to light.

Never been keen on her as a person but the charity has done wonderful  things for children and families. It was heartbreaking to see the people crying at the locked gates

Some are crying because their hand outs are being stopped.

nicko wrote:Some are crying because their hand outs are being stopped.

Careful Nicko, you'll be accused of not liking puppies or something.

nicko wrote:Some are crying because their hand outs are being stopped.

I try to be polite to you Nicko, because I know you are in pain.  But sometimes you are simply disgusting.

How about if your handout of drugs was stopped?

These are children in real need, not just of money, but of hope, advice, guidance and understanding.

DID you miss the bit where I said some?

Right Nicko... these extra hand outs on top of the over generous hand outs already given in benefits...



This so called 'charity' was rotten to the core.


The civil service called it a long time ago but Cameron overruled them to keep giving them money.


Money then stolen or given away to druggie scum so they wouldn't be stealing as much.

I read that a benefactor withdrew funding, so it's not just down to the Government withdrawing funding. There's a lot of stuff out there about the charity, some good and some bad - it's mostly allegations really.

It was totally self serving and paying their cronies lucrative sums in wages... I posted about this a while ago.. millions have disappeared!!!


And using the cover of helping children is just more low!!!

I read that SOME kids turn up once a week to collect money and are not seen again till the following week! Comment please sassy.

How did they know the children were in need? Did they check their backgrounds or what?

There are many 'charities' out there claiming to do great things to secure huge amounts of funding and then pay themselves and their friends vast sums of money in salaries for doing very little but to carry on telling people how great they are and needed they are to do this great work etc, purely self publicity at every opportunity while doing very little in reality except for the organised disappearance of money given to them... and with huge amounts of this being taxpayer funds given to them by central and/or local governments and councils etc!


A big con in other words!!!


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2899873/The-charities-like-quangos-Taxpayer-funding-account-half-50-s-annual-income.html

This part here says it all, really:

[quote]Although increasing numbers of children were suffering abuse, politicians had repeatedly shown they lacked the “moral fibre” to invest properly in child protection, she said.[end quote]


Disgusting.

There shouldn't really be a need for charities to protect children, should there?

Raggamuffin wrote:There shouldn't really be a need for charities to protect children, should there?

No! And that's the horrifically sad and desperate thing about it Rags.

eddie wrote:This part here says it all, really:

Although increasing numbers of children were suffering abuse, politicians had repeatedly shown they lacked the “moral fibre” to invest properly in child protection, she said.[end quote]


Disgusting.

???


A rather vague claim by who exactly?

Based on what exactly?

And surely better to be giving the money to existing official child protection services rather than this lot of highly paid and self serving self publicists and experts in doing very little else except make money disappear...!?

Tommy Monk wrote:

eddie wrote:This part here says it all, really:

Although increasing numbers of children were suffering abuse, politicians had repeatedly shown they lacked the “moral fibre” to invest properly in child protection, she said.[end quote]


Disgusting.

???


A rather vague claim by who exactly?

Based on what exactly?

And surely better to be giving the money to existing official child protection services rather than this lot of highly paid and self serving self publicists and experts in doing very little else except make money disappear...!?

The quote is from the article sassy posted in her OP.

So just waffle then...!?

"...Prime Minister David Cameron has defended the government's decision to give charity Kids Company £3m one week before its closure..."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-33822035

Where has this money gone!!!???

Surely it should be handed back!!!???


Or has it just disappeared like all the rest of the money...!?


It's all been a big bloody fraud!!!

"...Coldplay members have donated nearly £10million to Kids Company since 2007..."

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3191058/Coldplay-planning-multi-million-pound-bid-rescue-Kids-Company.html


Yet more millions that have disappeared through this company/"charity"... how much more???


And where has all the money gone!!!???

Have the Government got the 3 million quid back yet? I read that some of it had gone on salaries, but they can't have spent the rest of it. This is tax payers' money they've lost.

Many many millions have disappeared into this "charity" black hole...

Tommy Monk wrote:Many many millions have disappeared into this "charity" black hole...

Well they need to account for it, and explain what happened to it.

And They need to explain why they were handing out money to adult JSA claimants who went there with stories of being sanctioned by job centre for not complying with JSA rules.

Tommy Monk wrote:And They need to explain why they were handing out money to adult JSA claimants who went there with stories of being sanctioned by job centre for not complying with JSA rules.

I hadn't heard about that one Tommy.

The Government does need to be more accountable when they give public money away. It's all very well saying it's for charity, but it needs to be used properly.

IMO people give money to charity because they want to - their own money. This is not the Government's own money they're giving away.

It was on the radio from a former employee who said cash was dished out to JSA claimants who said they had no money because of sanctions... although they would have still been able to get hardship payments from the job centre and THey were obviously not young desperate vulnerable children if They were claiming JSA... they were adults.


Plus this money was handed out without any checks or verification of circumstances or on how the money was spent.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2899873/The-charities-like-quangos-Taxpayer-funding-account-half-50-s-annual-income.html


http://www.conservativehome.com/localgovernment/2015/03/labour-backs-charities-spending-taxpayers-money-on-lobbying.html


http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/4717/uk-funds-extremist-charities