Australia

Sep 10, 2013

All charity roads lead to World Vision. Why?

Australians are giving much more money to charity -- and World Vision is reaping the cash. Sydney-based freelance reporter Dylan Barber asks why the Christian charity has a stranglehold on the market.

Australians are donating twice as much to charities which fund overseas development as they were in 2000 — and the lion’s share is going to World Vision, the Christian-based giant in the market.

5 comments

Leave a comment

5 thoughts on “All charity roads lead to World Vision. Why?

  1. Jim Wright

    Twenty-odd years ago, I worked for Plan International, who at the time viewed World Vision with some disdain. A DVD of a German TV program was in circulation alleging that World Vision funds were held in interest-paying accounts for a year or so before being sent to the field and the accrued interest was used for other activities (e.g missionary work)of the parent churches. Later news indicated that processes had been changed and that all funds, however earned, did go to the fields. While today, I would not dream of denigrating the excellent work World Vision does, I do wonder whether there are processes in place to monitor the usage of money coming into the possession of charities run by organisations (such as churches) which also collect funds for their other activities.

  2. CML

    I won’t donate to ANY charity which is religion based. Religion causes enough problems on this planet, without encouraging them.
    Perhaps we could start an atheist charity fund??!! Might give some relief to the recipients of ‘god-bothering’ cr+p!

  3. Shaniq'ua Shardonn'ay

    I’m one of those people who did Sponsor a child for a year or two in the ’90’s and then stopped because I got sick of being bombarded with mail from world vision asking for more money. I’ve been pressured and signed up to other things here and there but always end up withdrawing for the same reason.
    I am also dubious about the charities who get people to sign up on the street but won’t tell you exactly how much goes to the backpacker hawking the charity and how much to the actual charity.
    Quite frankly I don’t really trust most of them.

  4. AR

    S/S – the usual split for the “charity” spruikers is a thrid to the street walker, a third to the organisation that supplies them and a third to the named “charity”. Then there are expenses, sundries and other costs.
    The remainder goes to the ostensible purpose.
    Rather as the priest answered when asked how “Peter’s Pence” got to the Great Flying Spaghetti Monster, “we throw the plate up into the air and what He wants he keeps and we get the rest”.

  5. Ashley Tuttle

    So no one minds if coke spends money marketing to sell more drinks. but if charities spend money on increasing there reach so they can do more over all good. then we all get upset. Seriously, people need to think! Which is better, a lot of almost nothing? or a little of a huge amount. it astounds me that the Australian public is so stupid and uneducated.

Share this article with a friend

Just fill out the fields below and we'll send your friend a link to this article along with a message from you.

Your details

Your friend's details

Sending...