Jimmy Savile charities 'consider their future'3

Governance | Niki May Young | 8 Oct 2012

The two charities bearing the name of Jimmy Savile are to "discuss their future" whilst also pondering a name change following the airing of a documentary that presented the now-deceased presenter as a paedophile.

A statement from the Jimmy Savile Charitable Trust advised that trustees had been contacted by members of the public suggesting it change its name and that the trustees are "in the process of looking into this".

The charity advised that "a large proportion of the funds the charity received came from donors other than the late Jimmy Savile, through fundraising and legacies" and said that the Trust has "recently committed substantial funds to medical research, hospitals and the Leeds Undergraduate Research Endowment".

The charity also advised that trustees "will be meeting soon to discuss how to best use the funds that remain at their disposal". Asked by civilsociety.co.uk if this was an indication that the charity may wind-up, a spokesperson said:

"No decisions have been made yet as to the future of the charity. The trustees' main aim obviously is to protect the charity beneficiaries they currently support. They will be meeting in the next couple of weeks to discuss the future."

According to its latest accounts the Trust, launched in 1984, had £3.7m carried forward from 31 March 2012. It spent £30,800 on charitable activities in the year prior to that and generated £132,500 in investment income.

The Jimmy Savile Stoke Mandevile Hospital Trust shares three of the trustees of the Jimmy Savile Charitable Trust and is also in discussion over its future following the ITV Exposure documentary that showed a number of accounts from women who said they were sexually abused by Savile while under the age of consent. The Trust was launched in 1981 to provide the relief of sickness by supporting the work of the Stoke Mandeville Hospital, for its spinal unit in particular. Its spending amounted to just £7,749 in the year ending 31 March 2012.

Meanwhile, the Sun newspaper has launched a campaign to strip Jimmy Savile of his knighthood, which he received in 1990 for his services. In his lifetime Savile is estimated to have raised £40m for charity.

And the NSPCC has advised it is "working closely with CEOP, ACPO and NAPAC to support anyone who has been affected by the issues raised in [the] documentary".

Place a comment

Elizabeth Liddell
Director
Charity Solutions
9 Oct 2012

I agree with the previous comment. I think any drastic action should wait until after the various enquiries that are underway have reported and then if necessary try to manage any changes deemed necessary to cause as little damage to the beneficiaries as possible. They are not the guiilty ones.

[Reply]

S Shortland
8 Oct 2012

I abhor all forms of abuse, but particularly against children. but I, and a number of my friends, are wondering why none of these people came forward when he was alive and something could be done about it.
All that has happened now is that charities that bear his name, or have a strong connection, are having to waste time and resources on actions to try and remove themselves from something that is unlikely ever to be proved one way or the other. Jimmy Saville will certainly not pay the price.
If the allegations are true, the victims will not have recieved justice and other people who need support may miss out becasue the charities that would help them have been boycotted.

[Reply]

Elena Joseph
Head of New Projects
Workplace Giving UK
9 Oct 2012
Response to [S Shortland]

I really do wish people would stop asking why these ladies didn't come forward while he was alive, firstly my understanding is that at least one did back in 2008 but nothing much happened, secondly why aren't we asking why all those who were working with him at the time and were completely aware of, at the very least, inappropriate behaviour, did they not come forward as these were adults.

It's tantamount to asking why an abused wife doesn't simply leave her abusor - it is rarely that simple.

[Reply]

Comments

[Cancel] | Reply to:

Name *

Email *

Organisation

Job Title

Comments *

Verification *

* Please read our Community Standards

Close »

Community Standards

The civilsociety.co.uk community and comments board is intended as a platform for informed and civilised debate.

We hope to encourage a broad range of views, however, there are standards that we expect commentators to uphold. We reserve the right to delete or amend any comments that do not adhere to these standards.

We welcome:

Robust but respectful debate
Strongly held opinions
Intelligent relevant discussion
The sharing of relevant experiences
New participants

We will not publish:

Rude, threatening, offensive, obscene or abusive language, or links to such material
Links to commercial organisations or spam postings. The comments board is not an advertising platform
The posting of contact details for yourself or others
Comments intended for malicious purpose or mindless abuse
Comments purporting to be from another person or organisation under false pretences
Gratuitous criticism, commentary or self-promotion
Any material which breaches copyright or privacy laws, or could be considered libellous
The use of the comments board for the pursuit or extension of personal disputes

Be aware:

Views expressed on the comments board are left at users’ discretion and are in no way views held or supported by Civil Society Media
Comments left by others may not be accurate, do not rely on them as fact
You may be misunderstood - sarcasm and humour can easily be taken out of context, try to be clear

Please:

Enjoy the opportunity to express your opinion and respect the right of others to express theirs
Confine your remarks to issues rather than personalities

Together we can keep our community a polite, respectful and intelligent platform for discussion.