Over they years I have acquired a reputation for looking at Tony Blair's affairs, so this is interesting, posted on his website today:
Tony Blair has formally announced to staff his decision to close Tony Blair Associates and wind up the Firerush and Windrush structures. He will gift the substantial financial reserves to the Not For Profit work, on which he will continue to spend the vast majority of his time. The text of the email he sent is as follows:
Over the past nine years we have built a group of organisations employing around 200 people and working in more than 20 different countries round the world.
It is time to take this to a new level.
As I indicated last December at our annual all staff meeting, I want to expand our activities and bring everything under one roof.
I also want now to concentrate the vast bulk of my time on the Not For Profit work which we do. De facto, this has been the case in the past two years but we need to reflect this change in the way we are structured.
To this end, we are going to make the following changes:
1. We will close down Tony Blair Associates and wind up the Firerush and Windrush structures. I will retain a small number of personal consultancies for my income, but 80% of my time will be pro bono on the Not For Profit side.
2. The substantial reserves that TBA has accumulated will be gifted to the Not For Profit work.
3. We will bring our organisations under one roof and are in the process of obtaining new premises to do so.
There will be further announcements as we implement these changes.
Ends
Three thoughts. One, I hope the charities do some diligence on the source of the funds they are offered. Two, I hope the new structure is as transparent as the existing ones are opaque. Three, I hope Tony Blair has realised that opacity is very old hat and will go above and beyond what is required by law.
I can live in hope.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Why criticise Tony Blair for having opaque sources of income? You are keeping the source of one of your grants a secret. As always you apply different rules for others than you apply to yourself.
The grant in question has ended
I agreed to keep the source secret because the trustee in question feared harassment: I decided her concern was reasonable and justifiable
What would you prefer? That she was exposed to such risk? And I have clearly indicated the scale
I would have preferred you to say that you were a champion of openess and so would have to decline a grant from someone who wanted to remain secret.
I would have preferred it that way
But this was an issue of privacy for an individual and not secrecy for a corporation
You may be able to confirm that a change in the Companies Act due next month will end corporate directorships. The Windrush/Firerush setups incorporate these. Virtue of necessity? Also, the Mail report quotes Blair as saying that ‘de facto’ he’s been doing what he now proposes for the last two years. For the last eighteen months, please see here, and above:
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2015/02/an-apology/comment-page-33/#comment-625186
I’m always a touch skeptical when I hear ‘not for profit’ as it doesn’t automatically mean ‘not without excessive salaries’ or ‘not without huge overheads’. I wonder what the case will be here.
Tony Soprano and the mafia comes to mind.
Has he gone big on gold? Which vaults in Switzerland are the ones?
Blair has an appalling record for spin, lies, deceit,on a fine tightrope of staying within the law (being from that profession)I feel for your source Richard, as no doubt he would know how to pin the blame on her if anything was untoward. Like his lies spun during Chilcott, those poor families are relying on the generosity of the enraged public to foot their legal bill whilst Blair is able to use the public purse. With all his millions. Clearly never a labour leader.
I was wondering (given his reported mania for being seen as a global leader) if he had decided to be a late entrant in the US presidential election?
Apprently they do like him over there? I mean, if Arnie can do it in California!!!!
The Birther issue may come up…
Which previous President might he claim to be a reincarnation of? Ulysses S. Grant?
Key words:
“……will retain a small number of personal consultancies for my income,”
How SMALL the number. How BIG the income from each.
Who knows!