Does ‘World Housing’ realize that
the homes it donates to the Cambodian Children’s Fund are not ‘gifted’ to poor
Cambodian families but rented to them by CCF at $15 a month?
Is ‘World Housing’ aware that
because the houses are erected on land owned by the Cambodian Children’s Fund
that the impoverished families to whom they are rented have no hope of ever
owning their homes?
Is ‘World Housing’ aware that CCF
imposes very strict rules and regulations on the families renting the donated
‘World Housing’ homes – including a ban on members of the extended family
visiting (or staying in) these homes?
Members of the Cambodian Children’s
Fund board
Dear Bob
Tufts,
Warren Share,
Kevin Schoeler,
Paul
Saunders,
David Ryan,
Seane Corn,
Muffy Disabatino,
Lily Kanter and
Heather
Graham
As you are well aware, and have
been for a long time, Scott Neeson does not answer questions put to him by
journalists regarding the Cambodian Children’s Fund.
Recently, I have tried putting
these same questions to Alan Lemon. He too refuses to answer questions or even
acknowledge that they have been asked.
A few days ago I asked these
questions of Lily Kanter, whose online profile suggested to me that she is the
kind of person who would understand the importance of an NGO like CCF being
both transparent and accountable to sponsors, donors and the media. I have
received no response.
I am now asking the board these
same questions. They can be found at:
# 129 Perhaps
CCF board member Lily Kanter will answer the questions Scott Neeson and Alan
Lemon refuse to answer?
# 128 Perhaps
Alan Lemon will answer the questions Scott Neeson refuses to answer!
And
# 127 The
Cambodian Children's Fund's 2014 IRS Tax Return. A few questions
Is the CCF Board committed to the
precepts of transparency and accountability? If not, what are sponsors and
donors to make of this fact? Given how much of what is to be found on the CCF
website is either untrue or misleading, how can sponsors and donors be sure
that their money is being spent effectively and not in a way that is damaging
to the very families it is meant to assist?
I have some more questions,
regarding CCF’s World Housing project.
(1) Who has bought, and continues
to buy, the land on which the World Housing houses are being built?
(2) How many homes has World
Housing donated to the Cambodian Children’s Fund to date?
(3) How many of the homes are
occupied by families now?
(4) How many people were the
houses designed to have living in them?
(5) How many people do the home
actually have living in them?
(6) How much rent must the
occupants pay per month? $15 a month is the amount most often mentioned by
those who rent the homes. Is this correct?
(7) Is it true that these donated
World Housing homes are only available to be rented by families who have
children who are in residential care with CCF?
(8) What are the rules and
regulations that families must agree to before they are allowed to rent the
homes that have cost CCF not one cent?
(9) Are the families renting
houses from CCF allowed to retain a copy of the contract they have entered into
with CCF?
(10) How many families have been
evicted as a result of their not being able to afford the $15 a month, if this
figure is correct?
(11) How many families have not
been able to abide by (or have been unwilling to abide by) the rules and
regulations laid down by CCF and have been evicted as a result?
On the basis of CCF’s 2013 tax
return, and with the application of a little maths, it is clear that CCF claims
to be spending $4,000 per CCF child per annum. Is this still the case in 2015?
It is difficult to make any mathematical calculations based CCF’s 2014 tax return, as it has been laid
out in such a way as to obscure what money is spent on which programs.
If CCF still claims to be
spending $4,000 per child per annum, do you board members believe it to be
necessary need to charge poor families $180 a year to live in homes that have
cost CCF nothing? $180 is a lot of money for a family that may earn as little
as $1000 a year working in the rubbish dump or, indeed, in any job available to
them. Has the board considered an alternative that would enable these families
to buy the homes that have been donated to CCF?
My concern (and please correct me
if I am making incorrect assumptions here) is that CCF is using donor and
sponsor money to buy land upon which it then constructs houses donated by World
Housing. Rather than using donor and sponsor money to help make families
self-sufficient, CCF is using these monies to make families totally dependent
on CCF. Not only does CCF have the children of these families as part of its
‘program’, (generating $4,000 a year in income per child for CCF), it also has
the families totally dependent on CCF and with no choice but to follow CCF
rules.
If the assumptions I am making
here are correct (and there is a mass of anecdotal evidence to suggest that
they are) Scott Neeson, with the blessing of the CCF board, is creating a
feudal estate with other people’s money and donated homes. Rather than empowering impoverished families,
CCF is turning them into 21st century serfs who can be turfed out
onto the street if they do not obey CCF rules and regulations or if they even
question them.
With CCF owning these family’s homes,
and with the family’s children in CCF care, how can they work towards
self-sufficiency and be able to make decisions for themselves? Is it the
intention of the board to infantilize these Cambodians? Make them totally
dependent on CCF?
If I do not receive any response
to this email I will write to all of CCF’s major sponsors and ask them if they
have asked any of the questions I have asked of Scott Neeson, Alan Lemon, Lily
Kanter and now the CCF board. If these sponsors and donors have not asked the
right questions they will not, at any point in thr future, be able to say, “Oh, we had no
idea what was going on at CCF. We were kept in the dark. We feel let down.”
If you are paying attention, as
you should be as members of the board, it should be abundantly clear to you
that CCF is a house of cards and that it will collapse one day. It took around
five years from the time Somaly Mam’s house of cards was public knowledge in
Cambodia before she was exposed as a liar and her card house came tumbling down.
Perhaps the same will apply with CCF. I hope not.
The Cambodian Children’s Fund
board, on which you all sit, has a duty of care to a few thousand Cambodians
and I fear that CCF is failing in its duty of care.
best wishes
James Ricketson
While you are at it Mr Ricketson you should ask the CCF board what happened to the $1 million that Andrew (Twiggy) Forrest gave to CCF. I dont see any reference to it on the CCF website or anywhere in any documents I have seen online.
ReplyDeleteI'd like to ad a question too. Who owns the land the restaurant Black Bamboo is situated at? I have eaten there and I must say the food was good but I wonder how relevant skills learned there by Cambodian youths is to the realities of their lives in Cambodia? I was wondering this aloud one night with some friends when one told me that CCF spent $300,000 renovating the building before opening Black Bamboo. As someone at the table pointed out, you don't spend $300,000 renovating a building you don't own. I think it is safe to assume that CCF owns the building but just in case this assumption is wrong, I would like to ask the members of the CCF board if CCF does in fact own Black Bamboo? If so, where did the money come from to buy the building and have it renovated? My guess is that the two, combined, would have set CCF back half a million dollars. If so, has this money been well spent? It was donated by people who believed that their donations were going to help impoverished Cambodians but how many such Cambodians are being helped - either through working at the restaurant or as a result of income generated by Black Bamboo? How much income does Black Bamboo generate in a year? Is anyone at CCF prepared to answer questions such as this? When I began to dip into the blog every now and then I thought that Ricketson had a bee in his bonnet about Scott Neeson and was just firing a shotgun at CCF hoping to hit something. Now, as the months pass and no answers are being given to his questions, I am wondering what CCF has to hide? If someone on the CCF board could please answer Mr Ricketson's questions I for one would appreciate it. I am not either a donor or a sponsor of CCF but I do live and work in Cambodia and am concerned that there are so many NGOs that are here for the wrong reasons. I look at CCF's financials and think, "There's a helluva lot of money flowing into CCF's coffers but what does CCF actually have to show for it other than feel-good photos on Facebook. I am not suggesting that CCF is doing no good but I would like to see evidence of it and to get some answers to the questions my friends and I have been asking amongst ourselves.
DeleteMr James Fucking Ricketson you have just proved again what an arrogant cunt you are. Why should any of these people answer questions from a loser like you who has nothing better to do with his time than defame good people trying to make a difference in Cambodia? Crawl back under your rock you fucking spider.
ReplyDeleteWell said 1.49. Ricketson is a shitstain on the underpants of Cambodia. He hates Scott Neeson becxause Mr Neeson has made something of himself in his life and Mr James Fucking Ricketson hasnt. Will someone put us all out of our misery and exterminate this pest?
ReplyDeletehonest people don't mind proving their good intentions; honest people do not mind answering questions about their actions;
ReplyDeleteOnly dishonest people with something to hide refuse to answer questions about their involvement in projects;
The question was asked of Mr Ricketson why anyone should answer his questions, because he asked an honest questions that should be able to be given an honest answer. If its really all about the children then prove that it is and help them even more............if its really about the kids then one would think that they would all be happy to respond to any question that might help them prove that they are honest; by hiding from questions, they are becoming more and more suspect as to their honesty...........by trying to discredit Mr Ricketson or anyone attempting to get at the truth, one is only causing more questions......
I read a while back, on the CCF Facebook page I think, that CCF had 'gifted' houses to poor families in Steung Meanchey. I can't find the word 'gifted' anywhere now. DId I imagine it or has it been removed since Mr Ricketson revealed that the homes 'gifted' to CCF by World Housing are not then 'gifted' to poor families.
ReplyDeleteMy questions for the CCF board (though I do not expect to get answers), are these:
ReplyDeleteHow much does each World Housing house cost to build?
How much does CCF charge World Housing for each house?
I know the answer. Many people within CCF know the answer. I am curious to know if the CCF board would be interested in making the answers to these questions public?
I can tell you one rule that Scott Neeson has imposed on his 'serfs'. Members of their family are not allowed to visit or stay in the house. I know this from talking to one family who could not abide by the rules and left the community. The reasoning behind this rule is that CCF does not want too many people living in their houses and does not want drug addicts and drunks visiting. One one level this makes sense but is it Mr Neeson's job to tell Cambodians who can visit their homes and who cannot? He has not paid $1 for the homes World Housing has given CCF and yet he reserves the right to tell tenants how to live their lives. I also know how much costs CCF to build these pre-fab homes and wonder if World Housing knows that it is being conned by CCF. I won't let the cat out of the bag just now. I will wait to see if the CCF board answers the questions asked by Anonymous 5.55 above.
ReplyDeleteSo many questions, so few answers!
ReplyDeleteMy question is: "How much money has 'Velcro' shovelled into CCF coffers?"
We all know that CCF has been writing his autobiography in Tuscany thanks to his Velcro sponsor, but how much money has she actually given to CCF and where, in the books, does this money show up. or the money from Sumner Redstone for that matter? Has Neeson set up the perfect scam? It certainly seems that way. Money (millions of dollars) flow into CCF's accounts (tax free) and all Neeson needs to do is publish some photos of cute kids and, lately, a few 'grannies' and these, multi-millionaire suckers write out huge cheques without asking any questions. As P.T. Barnum said, "There's a sucker born every minute." Neeson's time in Hollywood marketing films has served him well. He is now marketing children, with a few 'grannies' thrown in to make it seem that he sincerely cares about Cambodian communities!
Need to fully develop a list of top donors, Neeson stopped publishing this list (I believe) in 2012. Velcro would likely be on it along with Redstone. In 2014 -3 donors contributed 55% of the total money ($11.1M in total). As reported on the 2014 tax return, they were from US and European sources. Stop the funds, stop Neeson from taking more children.
DeleteMy question for you Mr Ricketson is why you are so obsessed with Scott Neeson? Why do you hate him so much? Is it because he refuses to answer your questions and you've got your knickers in a knot. Poor diddums, dont like to be ignored do you?
ReplyDeleteThe answer to this question is easy. Ricketson is a fucking retard.
DeleteGee Anonymous 5;59, do you think it might have something to do with Neeson taking over 700 children from their families? Do you think it might have something to do with the harm that is done to children by raising in institutional care? Do you think it might have something to do with the way CCF treats an impoverished familly because they owe CCF $12.50? Do you think it might have something to do with the refusal by CCF to return children their families, even when they request that they want their children back? Do you think it might have something to do with the thumb printed contracts that CCF holds, but won't disclose the contents of or give copies to the family? Do you think it might be Neeson words that started the ball rolling on David Fletcher?
DeleteNeeson might be the most child destructive person in the 21st century and you and the idiot, Anonymous 6;49 want to defend him??
Team Neeson shoots the messenger! Again! You need to recruit some smarter members to your team, Scott!
DeleteInteresting that we do not hear too much from James about the 700+ kids his great mates at Friends International have in captivity. Like everything else he is only interested in running others down and not considering that the organisation he supports "took more children from their families" No doubt he will find a way to tell us that it is different when Friends International do it.
ReplyDeleteI have noticed there are several questionable items in the Friends International Annual Report that deserve closer examination, perhaps he should concentrate on them. I have no intention of personally publishing them as I feel that like CCF Friends overall do a good job but maybe others would like to go online and take a look. I am surprised that as an "investigative journalist" James has not picked up on them (unless of course he has a personal grudge against Scott Neeson)
Dear Anonymous 8.23 and 5.59
DeleteI don't hate Scott Neeson. I have never met him.
Scott entered my life quite by chance when the parents of two girls in residential care with CCF asked for my help in having the girls returned to the family. Scott refused to return the girls, citing a contract they had entered into with CCF. The parents claimed there was no contract but even if there had been, what right did Scott have to keep the girls when their parents wanted them back?
The full story of what happened can be found here:
http://cambodianchildrensfund.blogspot.com/
Scott eventually gave the mother of the family a job at CCF and she was obliged to sign a non-disclosure contract.
I eventually had to admit defeat and gave up on my attempts to get the girls returned to their family. I was, at the time, busy trying to get two other girls returned to their family.These two girls had been illegally removed by an NGO by the name of the "SHE Rescue Home'. This NGO, run by a Brisbane-based church of Evangelical Christians (Brisbane Australia) fought tooth and nail to hang onto the girls. It took me six years, in all, to have the girls returned to their family. In the process Citipointe church threatened me, in writing, with arrest and jailing if I did not desist from criticising the church in public - namely on this blog:
http://citipointechurch.blogspot.com/2013/04/please-leigh-ramsay-do-people-of.html
I did not cease criticising the church and it dragged me into court. You can in you are interested, read all about it in my blog.
There are hundreds of NGOs in Cambodia and I am sure that there are many which, if one were to look closely, would reveal the same facts as have emerged from my looking closely at the Cambodian Children's Fund. I do not have the time and energy to look at all these NGOs, including 'Friends'. All I can say is that in my 20 years of dealing with 'Friends' I have been impressed with the NGO's honesty and integrity. In my few years of dealing with Scot Neeson call i can say is that I take with a huge grain of salt anything he says. I am being as polite as I possibly can be here.
I should add here that having given up trying to get the two young girls returned to their family, Scott Neeson next came to my attention when I learned that he had played a significant role in having David Fletcher jailed for 10 years for a crime he could not have committed. I do not need to go over the details here. Suffice it to say that I have no respect for a man who takes children from their families and refuses to return them when asked and who will use the media and his connections to have a 'competitor' (in the rubbish dump) jailed without a trial.
If I were a sponsor or a donor and was concerned about how my money was being spent I would ask all of the questions I am asking. And, if I was not satisfied with the answers or (as is the case) no answers at all were forthcoming, I would direct my money to an NGO that was both transparent and accountable.
I thought, for some time, that the CCF board may be blissfully unaware of what actually takes place at CCF. Clearly, the board is not. It knows. Its members must have asked Scott the same questions I have and, presumably, decided that is answers were good ones or that they did not want to upset the apple cart by (if you will excuse the mixing of metaphors) opening up a can of toxic worms.
That's neatly lets Friends off the hook Mr Ricketson and does nothing to ally my suspicion that you have a person grudge against Scott Neeson.
DeleteDear Anonymous 11.04
DeleteIf you want to go down this 'personal grudge' route, I also have a personal grudge against Prime Minister Hun Sen for behaving like a dictator, against 3 successive Australian Ministers for Foreign Affairs for turning a blind eye to the illegal removal of children from their families by Australian-based Citipointe church, against Pastor Leigh Ramsey for carrying out these illegal removals, against the Global Development Group for funding Citipointe church' 'SHE Rescue Home' in the full knowledge that it was removing children illegally from their families, against LICADHO for turning a blind eye...and so on. Indeed, you could go back through my blogs and my documentaries and make up a very long list of people and institutions against which I bear a grudge.
As it happens, investigative journalism of the kind that this blog entails has occupied only a very small part of my career as a filmmaker. What about journalists who, like John Pilger, spend decades exposing human rights abuses? Are they motivated to do so purely and simply because they hold 'personal grudges'?
Your argument is nonsensical.
Correct Anon 11.04. James thinks that the fact he has known of Friends International for 20 years gives the organisation credibility, in fact if he has been associated with it then in my mind it does exactly the opposite. Why is it that he thinks he can hide the fact that Friends International keep over 700 kids behind barb wired walls. One only has to look at their annual report to realise that an organisation with such a massive staff turnover has some pretty big internal problems. But to James that is irrelevant. As long as he can publicly give others the opportunity to slag Scott off he is happy. At the end of the day sadly we will from time come across nasty individuals such as James who has more interest in helping convicted child sex offenders that doing anything meaningful with his life
ReplyDeleteDear Team Neeson
DeleteThis one has your finger prints all over it.
Are you suggesting that unless I also investigate all the other NGOs in Cambodia engaged in 'rescuing' children that I have no right to ask questions of Scott Neeson, Alan Lemon, Lily Kanter and now the CCF board?
If you have evidence that suggests that Friends has 'pretty big internal problems', start your own blog or do whatever you feel is right and/or necessary to bring this information to the attention of sponsors and donors.
As for David Fletcher, the only reference I have made to him in the past few blog entries is to the effect that Scott Neeson was deeply implicated in having a man imprisoned without a trial. This goes to the question of Neeson's character - as does his refusal to return children to their families when asked by the parents to do so; as does his refusal to allow parents to retain copies of 'contracts' they enter into with CCF.
These instances (along with countless others) raise serious concerns about Neeson's character. Team Neeson's continual reference back to David Fletcher is its clumsy ham-fisted way of trying to justify not answering questions: "We are not going to answer your questions because you haven't asked Friends the same questions and anyway you are defending a known sex offender."
Just answer the questions, Team Neeson - a team that now includes all the members of the CCF board.
Is it actually true that CCF has taken over 700 children from their families? It sounds unbelievable that one person could be responsible for doing so much damage to children.
ReplyDeleteDear Mr Ricketson
ReplyDeleteI believe that your next letter should be to Sumner Redstone.
My guess is that Mr Redstone is CCF’s biggest sponsor. My guess also is that he has swallowed the Neeson narrative hook, line and sinker and has no idea that he is giving money to what is essentially a scam based on the removal of children from their families.
My guess is that he is a very busy man and does not concern himself with small details such as how $700,000 donations used:
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/sumner-redstone-donates-700000-cambodian-423020
However, Mr Redstone probably has a large staff and amongst them a publicist who might find it worth his or her while to spend a few hours going through this blog and saying to Mr Redstone, “Sir, I think you need to pay some attention here. There are some questions you need to ask of Scott Neeson abut the uses to which he is putting your money.”
A letter addressed to Sumner Redstone Newton Center, MA 02459, will get to his office.
I hope that this information is useful to you.
You are a lowlife cunt Ricketson
ReplyDeleteI'm with you 7.01. Most of what James fucking Ricketson writes about Scott and CCF is bullshit. A pest in need of extermination
DeleteDear Team Neeson
DeleteYour observation that 'most' of what I write 'about Scott and CCF is bullshit' suggests some of it may be true. Can you please enlighten us as to which parts of what I write fall into the 'bullshit' category and which parts do not?
I think you will find, if you actually read what I write, that the observations I make about Scott Neeson and CCF are far outweighed by the number of questions I ask. So, just as an exercise, why don't you separate out my questions from my observations and tell me (and others reading this) which of my questions is bullshit?
To be very specific, because I know that Team Neeson has real difficulty with the question/answer process, which of the 11 questions i have asked on this particular blog do you believe should not be asked because they are 'bullshit'?
I await your reply. I know that is will be a long wait!
Thanks for reminding me that I am a cunt Anonymous 7.01. I had almost forgotten :-)
DeleteSince I don't really know you, I don't know if you are a 'low life cunt' or not. I have read enough of your work though that makes me believe that your efforts to help these children, that Neeson has taken from their families, is absolutely HEROIC!! Please keep up your good work.
DeleteWell James, it seems that Scott has a lot of power,,,,,,,,if he can have an innocent man put in prison because he is actually helping children; from the responses I see from scott's people is that they have little to say other that fuck and cunt; not real smart sounding but maybe they have nothing more to add to this conversation.....keep at it James, keep asking questions,,,,,I want to know why Scott had David Fletcher imprisoned? Why the English speaking media won't even look into your claims and questions.
ReplyDeleteI suspect James that you might have stumbled upon another scam
ReplyDeleteRight, so World Housing is conspiring with Scott Neeson to....what, precisely? Give homes to poor people. Shock, horror! How dare they! You are a fucking idiot 10.32
DeleteLet's look deeper. Is Team Neeson afraid of that? They should be!!
DeleteWhat did Neeson have to do with Fletcher being imprisoned, was he seen as competition at the tip? Fletcher was a very unpleasant individual but not guilty of the crimes he is charged with.
ReplyDeleteI have a problem with CCF still using old pictures of kids at the tip as bait for donors, its a fruad. That tip closed down years ago.