BRAKE is sponsored by profit vested interest companies from motor insurance, public transport and yes even a speed camera firm.
Part of my complaint to the Charity Commission:
'........It's interference, commentary and media statements are way beyond victim support, which I applaud and is into the very dangerous life and death realms of matters on which it has no expertise or understanding; as such BRAKE is therefore not only political but probably highly dangerous as well. The danger is that most of the very lucrative Road Safety Industry that supports BRAKE, are not only with a vested interest of massive profit but most of its activity does not stop one single road accident either. Incorrect conclusions in road safety will also kill!
If the Charity Commission are to allow BRAKE to make statements on other than victim support or to interfere in the life and death issue of road safety, then I charge that they have vested interest supporters and are thus themselves with a vested interest and that must cease. If they wish to continue to make statements about driving and road safety then they should acknowledge independent experts who are willing to assist a correct conclusion otherwise they will be no more than a political anti driver group with little knowledge of their subject. Is that what the Charity Commission supports as this subject is far too serious to be made a political one as seems to be the case with BRAKE...........'
I totally agree with this view - the majority of BRAKES media comments are either emotional 'knee jerk' reactions or only based on anecdotal evidence.
ReplyDeleteI would like Officers who take statements from witnesses to accidents to include whether or not that witness is a driver or non driver.
Ican say honestly that if you were to stand the average person at the side of the road and ask them to estimate the speed of any given vehicle - most will not even come close with the majority over estimating
Have the Charity Commission responded and maybe other people would like to write to the commission with their concernes over Brake's activities.
ReplyDeleteIt does seem strange that a clearly political group such as Brake are given charitable status.
Yes Peter see my later post, Charity Commission replies.
ReplyDeleteAnd this analysis of their reply by another follower:
'The Charities Commission are a politicised organisation who were integral to the last Government's agenda and find themselves at the centre of this Governments.
The way forward?
"The charity's objects include environmentally related purposes and the Commission's role does not extend to determining the accuracy or scientific basis for statements made by the charity in furtherance of those purposes."
Translation - Spout any old green BS and we'll call you a charity.
"We acknowledge that the charity's website lists as Supporters/Donors a number of organisations and commercial enterprises which could indeed be held to have interests in areas associated with motoring. These interests are however beyond the remit of the Commission to address or comment on."
Translation
"We don't care how you finance yourself or how corrupt your Charity is"
"For many people, an atmosphere which becomes un-breathable/unhealthy due to increased carbon content"
Translation
"We know stuff all about science"
Are the Charities Commission the right body to oversee the the introduction of the 'Big Society'?
Use Brake as a specific example of why the CC needs reforming if the 'Big Society is to be delivered with any credibility and write to the Daily Mail. If defending Brake threatens the cushy jobs at the CC then you might get some results' END.
"credibility" and write "Daily Mail" in the same article...come on now, you can't be serious.
ReplyDelete