Google analytics

Sunday, 29 January 2012

This Cat needs drowning

The problem is that this cat is already drowning in government funding.

I was reading James Delingpole’s blog in the Torygraph when one supporter of the AGW scam mentioned certain reading. It was a so called environmental charity that I’d never heard of before

Centre for Alternative Technology

Britain's major centre for environmental inspiration and courses.

Of course you get the mindless newspeak confronting you:


Mission Statement

CAT is concerned with the search for globally sustainable, whole and ecologically sound technologies and ways of life.

Within this search the role of CAT is to explore and demonstrate a wide range of alternatives, communicating to other people the options for them to achieve positive change in their own lives.

This communication involves:

  • Inspiring - instilling the desire to change by practical example
  • Informing - feeding the desire to change by providing the most appropriate information
  • Enabling - providing effective and continuing support to put the change into practice.

CAT has a holistic approach to its work, integrating ideas and practice relating to land use, shelter, energy conservation and use, diet and health, waste management and recycling.

Through its resident community and work organisation, CAT is also committed to the implementation of co-operative principles and best achievable environmental practices.

As far as I’m concerned this is another fake charity trying to “nudge” us back to an agrarian society.


Of course these people will need to be funded and being of an enquiring mind I just sort of wandered around their site until I found this:

How is CAT funded ?

CAT receives almost no grant or government funding for its ongoing activities. It has received significant grants towards its new building, the Wales Institute for Sustainable Education, and for other projects. This capital funding is shown in the year end accounts of CAT Charity Limited, in addition to operating income.

But dig deeper and you find that they are somewhat economical with the truth in that statement.

This little part of a table in their accounts for 2009 exposes their little scam.



That adds up  to £1,617,256 out of their total funding of £2,124,398. Hardly what they state above in their funding statement?

This is not a charity, it’s a semi government funded Quango. I don’t object to charities, but if they can’t subsist on private charity, then they shouldn’t exist.

I also dug up that before 2006 there were only four categories of charity enshrined in law.

  1. the relief of poverty,
  2. the advancement of education,
  3. the advancement of religion, and
  4. other purposes considered beneficial to the community.

Bugger me, but how that has expanded. There are now 13. and guess what comes creeping in at number 9.

the advancement of environmental protection or improvement

How many are there of those so called charities that are only existing, by being fed from my hard one income and paid from my tax?

There is a need for a small department to be set up to strip these fake charities of their funding.

I’ll do the job for a small fee. (With bonuses of course)


  1. Unfortunately both parties spotted that they could use the vehicle of pretendy charities as publicly funded holding tanks for their would-be MPs and party workers.

    I've just finished speaking to one young person who is mightily pleased that they are going to be 'working' with a think tank 'voluntarily'. This means the quango will pay them some money.

    I'm cross because this young person is another Oxbridge graduate (actually, it is mostly Oxford ones, Cambridge graduates are much more employable) who intends not to do a stroke of proper work in their entire life as they have the idea that they are entitled to rule us all.

  2. The number of categories makes little difference. If they weren't a No 9 they would call themselves educational.

  3. They appear to have undergone a "re-branding" at some point. They last time I looked at this lot they weren't using the trendy "CAT" abbreviation. I note they have a couple of job vacancies:

    Financial Controller on £30,000 PA, and an "Emergence Summit Co-ordination Officer" on £3,497 pro rata for 8 hours per week.

    The first vacancy states: "The organisation now has around 140 employees (FTE 80) across two companies – CAT Charity Limited and CAT plc" so why don't they just close the charity and continue as a PLC? Oh, silly me, if they did that they wouldn't get loads of free wonga....


Say what you like. I try to reply. Comments are not moderated. The author of this blog is not liable for any defamatory or illegal comments.