# What is one to make of some of the recent developments in this credit crunch malarkey?

- Link: https://fundraising.co.uk/2008/10/31/what-one-make-some-recent-developments-credit-crunch-malarkey/
- Published: 2008-10-31T18:39:27+00:00
- Author: Finbar Cullen

There have been a few reports of banks, etc., likely to be sued for allegedly marketing
investment products that they knew to be all but worthless. What are we to make 
of institutions and their (often well-paid and well-connected) directors etc., while
cases are in the pipeline, and once the legal decisions have been made? Speaking
personally, it does appear that a fair amount of rubbish was marketed as worthwhile
investments. Should any allowance be made for that in prospect research reports,
and fundraising considerations?

And what about banks that choose not to access government funds because they want
to retain greater commercial freedom (whatever products that might lead to), including
the freedom to pay generous bonuses, as in the past. Should fundraisers and researchers
be worried about any aspect of this?

Finbar Cullen

## Advertisement

Research**Plus**

 * **[How are those 09’s crunch time budgets shaping up?](https://fundraising.co.uk/2008/11/03/how-are-those-09s-crunch-time-budgets-shaping/)**(
   3 November 2008)
 * **[Working out how hard the credit crunch is really hitting](https://fundraising.co.uk/2008/11/05/working-out-how-hard-credit-crunch-really-hitting/)**(
   5 November 2008)
 * **[How will the recession change fundraising strategies](https://fundraising.co.uk/2008/11/05/how-will-recession-change-fundraising-strategies/)**(
   5 November 2008)

## Comments

### By: admin

- Link: https://fundraising.co.uk/2008/10/31/what-one-make-some-recent-developments-credit-crunch-malarkey/#comment-3355
- Published: 2008-11-01T13:10:38+00:00

I suppose it all comes down to the issue of accepting ‘tainted money’. Should a 
charity accept money from a financial institution that not only couldn’t stay solvent
but has arguably set back many charitable causes for years to come by causing the
redirection of billions of government funds that might have been directed at other
more socially beneficial activities?

I’ve always been taught as a fundraiser that ethical decisions don’t come into accepting
donations, unless of course the donation would contravene money laundering legislation
or would, under Charity Commission guidelines, adversely affect a charity’s reputation
or function.

However, given current reports of corporate snouts in the trough of the tax-payers’
bailout money for bonuses (see [Rescued bank to pay millions in bonuses](http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2008/nov/01/royal-bank-scotland-vincent-cable)
at The Guardian), I’m just glad I’m not a corporate fundraiser having to make that
choice.