# Good News and Bad News for Primark … and the Garfield Weston Foundation?

- Link: https://fundraising.co.uk/2009/01/15/good-news-and-bad-news-primark-and-garfield-weston-foundation/
- Published: 2009-01-15T09:40:11+00:00
- Author: Finbar Cullen

Some time ago there was widespread criticism for Primark (and Asda and Tesco), after
the retailers were accused of using suppliers who employed poorly paid workers in
Bangladesh. War on Want claimed that workers earned as little as 7p an hour for 
working up to 80-hours a week.

Whilst the latest figures from Primark show that business is booming, the BBC has
just reported that one of Primark’s suppliers (in England), was employing staff 
who worked up to 12 hours a day for £3.50 an hour, well below the minimum wage.

The Garfield Weston Foundation is a major grant-making trust, and derives a substantial
proportion of its income from its interests in Wittington Investments Limited, which
is Associated British Foods plc’s ultimate holding company. ABF owns Primark, amongst
other well known brands. The Foundation therefore owns a fair sized chunk of Primark.
Does this matter? How far should fundraisers go in researching the ethics of (potential)
supporters? If Primark, Asda and Tesco (and other potential supporters) sell clothes,
are they bound to be drawn into scandals such as this from time to time? How closely
should fundraisers and researchers examine the investments of major donors?

## Advertisement

Finbar Cullen

Research**Plus**

 * **[Top donors in the USA](https://fundraising.co.uk/2009/01/27/top-donors-usa/)**(
   27 January 2009)
 * **[Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator – online survey](https://fundraising.co.uk/2009/01/27/office-scottish-charity-regulator-online-survey/)**(
   27 January 2009)
 * **[What do you do when the Charity Commission accounts don't list recipients of grants?](https://fundraising.co.uk/2009/01/28/what-do-you-do-when-charity-commission-accounts-don039t-list-recipients-grants/)**(
   28 January 2009)

## Comments

### By: admin

- Link: https://fundraising.co.uk/2009/01/15/good-news-and-bad-news-primark-and-garfield-weston-foundation/#comment-3473
- Published: 2009-01-15T14:02:56+00:00

Thanks for pointing that out Finbar.

I’d say that fundraising researchers should have a role not only in sourcing prospective
donors but also establishing their background and context.

It’s a question of degree of course (and no doubt resources), but charities should
at least be made aware of the potential for negative publicity should they choose
to accept funding from a particular individual, company or trust.

Some charities will have no issue with accepting funds from a source that other 
charities would baulk at. Arms manufacturers, car manufacturers, oil companies are
some of the obvious potential problems.

‘Tainted money’ is not a new issue of course for the sector. Charities have faced
the criticism and the occasional press expose of their financial investment policies
over the years.

But prospect researchers are in a good position to help steer them through this 
complicated area when it comes to potential donations.

The final decision on seeking/accepting funding though would have to come from the
senior fundraiser and ultimately from the trustees.