Our Boys ripped off by the MoD

[KNG2007]

I had a stay at headley court a few years back,great place but it was bursting at the seam back then so I can only imagin the amount of work the RAF are puttiing in now. This govenment is happy to sit back alow charitys like H4H raise all the money without dipping their had in to help finance for the new much needed swimming Pool. It will take a long time to raise that money but at the same time the MOD is taking, sorry demanding a cut from donations becuse of tresury rules just takes the mick. Im sure this could be stopped.:ugh:







http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article622810.ece (http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article622810.ece)

SCROOGE MoD chiefs are making a fortune by charging forces’ charities for holding fundraising events on military land.


Warped ministry rules — exposed by The Sun today — mean do-gooders have to pay full commercial rents for their events.


In one of the worst examples, the Army Benevolent Fund was landed with a £7,000 bill for using Sandhurst for a gala — while top actress Dame Judi Dench and singer Myleene Klass gave up their time for free.


Other charities hit include the SSAFA — who help hard-up squaddies and their families — and Children In Need.


Livid soldiers are petitioning PM Gordon Brown against making charities pay the same rent as private firms for events ranging from posh dinners to sponsored bike rides and parachute jumps.



Up to a sixth of cash raised by charity events on military land in the last 18 months has gone to paying the rents — making the Treasury tens of thousands of pounds.

The Sun’s Jeremy Clarkson, patron of our Help For Heroes campaign, said: “Forces charities don’t exist to make money for shareholders — they do it for the MoD’s own people.


“If the Government has any compassion it must scrap these charges immediately.”


The online petition to the PM already has almost 1,000 signatures, including serving officers.


New Lib-Dem leader Nick Clegg last night vowed to champion the issue in Parliament.


He said: “We ask for the ultimate sacrifice from our servicemen and women yet the Government continues to treat them in this shabby and disrespectful way.”


An MoD spokeswoman said: “We charge to recover insurance, maintenance and admin fees — and cannot differentiate charities from other organisations.”


Sign the petition here http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/servicecharities/#detail (http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/servicecharities/#detail)

[Pilot Pacifier]

Bumped and signed...

[reallydeskbound]

Lets get this to the top and its worth considering as a 'sticky' for a few weeks to attract weight of numbers to this well worthy petition.
Its time the parsimonious bean counters at the MOD - there is not one who wears a uniform by the way - were read the riot act by not only our own senior commanders but by politicians of all hues.
As a commander I regularly 'choked' with anger at my inability to wave any charge inflicted on charities - whether Service or civilian - using my base to hold a function. Some mealy-mouthed civ-sec at headquarters would insist on either the the charity or myself meeting the costs of their so called 'administration' and overheads.
I have an answer to the so-called MOD spokesperson quoted above - charge those who can afford it extra if they want to hold events on MOD property and leave Service Charities alone - there is such a thing as solidarity of purpose and we in the Services, and our charities, are united in supporting those of our own who need help. I dare say spokesperson you don't wear a uniform - but I bet you read these forums regularly - if you have the 'balls' speak out and tell your masters that we are fed up with the uniformed being blamed for civil servants dictates.
to couple it all a colleague who for years has organised charitable events tells me that his application for a BBMF overflight has elicited the response for a £20 application fee to cover admin charges with no guarantee that he will be lucky - and with no refund if unsuccessful!
Rant off - petition signed :*

[orgASMic]

Signed.

Surely charity begins at home.

[Pontius Navigator]

An MoD spokeswoman said: “We charge to recover insurance, maintenance and admin fees — and cannot differentiate charities from other organisations

Only one word applies B:mad:S

Insurance may be a fixed expense no matter what is going on but maintenance and admin fees!

What maintenance bill can a 'small', in terms of time, function run up? If it is a question of toilets, heat, light, by all means charge a fee and that could be varied.

But Admin Fees? Any Admin is done by the people at the site and NO MONEY ever goes near them. If they are trying to offset the cost of the civil serpent who is writing out the bill for insurance, maintenance and admin fees then that is your proverbial self-licking lolipop.

For instance the Beeb wanted to do some filming and offered a small fee to do it. The civil serpent said NO, full fee or no. The Beeb then simply filmed anyway but outside the wire and without any beneficial MOD publicity. :(

[ZOFO]

Signed and Bump again, Utter disgrace, I hope you have seen the half cocked response to the petition from No 10

Happy New year to all anyway from all at the Zofo Household, to all overseas Keep safe

Zofo

[November4]

Good to see the Sun is publishing "new" news.....PPRuNe - 1 Oct 07 (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=294389)

But at last it is being brought to the publics attention.

[Melchett01]

Tossers the lot of them.

Signed with pleasure and bumped. This goes on until Sep 08, lets see if we can cause a bit of embarrassment in the Treasury eh?!

PS interesting to note that when it asks for your address, you have the option of leaving the box blank and selecting Armed Forces from the drop down menu below. Or so it would appear - just tried and no dice, it wants your address. So if you want to retain some vestige of annonimity or just don't want to make it easy for them to harrass you, it appears that writing 'see comment below ref Armed Forces' gets your signature accepted without giving them your home address / base.

[spheroid]

Signed and bumped.


If the charity isn't going to pay for the insurance then who payes for it?

Does it comne out of the defence budget?

If it does then Id rather have some decent NVG goggles and some better flying boots and can we have some decent Nav bags that don't disintegrate after a week?

[N Joe]

It's sad that I'm no longer shocked by stories like this. Signed with pleasure.

N Joe

[Shack37]

Signed and up top again.
s37

[VinRouge]

Wider markets Initiative. As per usual, they know the price of everything and the value of nothing. I wonder exactly how much WMI cost to set up and implement? I bet it wasnt cheap...

[Da4orce]

Disgusted and duly signed :ok:

[Squirrel 41]

Ah, sounds like the wonders of "Selling Into Wider Markets" all over again. What a completely appalling state of affairs, delighted to sign and happy to send back to the top.

S41

[C130 Techie]

It is sad to realise that I was not surprised by this.

Signed.

[matkat]

Signed. This is just so typical of Government(not only this one) I still remember getting income support during the 70s nothing seems to change.:ugh:

[tezzer]

Signed, by a humbled civilian, disgraced by the way he Government treats our servicemen.

[BEagle]

The greed of the civil serpents and their loathsome 'Wider Marketing Initiative' pervades everywhere these days.

Some years ago, some administrivial idiot civil serpent said that a station was expected to pay for a VC10 to appear on static display for their families' day.

The station in question? Brize Norton. Fortunately even Kelvin Rucksack told him to ram it!

We also had to fight off the civil serpents' attempts to make a Service flying club's aircraft pay the full MoD landing fees - for landing at a different Service aerodrome....... How long before stations are obliged to have 'pay and display' car parks, I wonder?

But for miserable bean-counting civil serpents to extract payment for charitable events in support of Service welfare is inexcusable.

[FantomZorbin]

DCO.

Reminds me of when the MOD insisted on charging the St John's Ambulance Flight landing fees at EGUY for delivering transplant organs to Papworth - we were then open 24hrs. Flights were then moved to Alconbury where the USAF was happy to oblige FOC.:ugh:

[EdSet100]

Signed and bumped

[gravity victim]

Why does this government always seem to take the shabbiest alternative available to it, and have to be dragged kicking and screaming to do the decent thing?
Signed and bumped.

[KNG2007]

Here was two from the Times on the same subject. The event at RAF Brize Norton was mentioned.

Helping Veterans the MoD Way
http://timesonline.typepad.com/mick_smith/2007/02/helping_veteran.html (http://timesonline.typepad.com/mick_smith/2007/02/helping_veteran.html)


How Low Can the MoD Stoop?
http://timesonline.typepad.com/mick_smith/2007/02/helping_veteran.html (http://timesonline.typepad.com/mick_smith/2007/02/helping_veteran.html).

What gets my goat is the fact the MOD party line is a blatant lie. Event liability Insurance has to be taken out by the Charity organiser via a private firm before the MOD will give a Defence Estates licence and demands their cut after, as Charity insurance is not MOD core funded business. The insurance covers accident and any damage to MOD property or equipment.
What's more unsettling is the fact the MOD have admitted that they have not financially contributed towards The new Gym and Pool needed at Headley court. Just happy to sit back and let the very same charity's do all the work.


http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/servicecharities/#detail

[Fg Off Max Stout]

An MoD spokeswoman said: “We charge to recover insurance, maintenance and admin fees — and cannot differentiate charities from other organisations.”

What utter horsesh1t. Perhaps the matter of insurance can be left to the charities themselves, and they, not the MoD, can decide whether they need zillion dollar insurance to hold a tea party. As for maintenance and admin fees, the MoD answer is simply not good enough. Why can't you differentiate? Would that be because of feeble-minded terminal idiocy, deplorable jobsworth commercialism within a non-commercial organisation or a total inability to exercise common sense and discretion. Someone needs a slap. Much of the work done by service charities is work that should be government funded in the first place; to try to profit from such a charity's work is deplorable.

As others have already said, nothing surprises me any more. What a sad state of affairs.

[ZH875]

Why can't you differentiate? Would that be because of feeble-minded terminal idiocy, deplorable jobsworth commercialism within a non-commercial organisation or a total inability to exercise common sense and discretion.


Neither,




There is no box on JPA to do this.

[Avitor]

Signed, with a flourish. :cool:

[Yeller_Gait]

Melchett,

PS interesting to note that when it asks for your address, you have the option of leaving the box blank and selecting Armed Forces from the drop down menu below. Or so it would appear - just tried and no dice, it wants your address.


As long as you put something in the address box, ie a full stop or similar, it will accept it. You can then select Armed Forces.

Having said that, "they" can probably find out who you are from your e-mail address if they really want to!

Y_G

[Say again s l o w l y]

:mad::mad::mad::mad::ugh::ugh::ugh:

I am again left speechless by something to with this Givernment and the armed forces. Disgusted wouldn't be the word for it.

Anyway on another note, I've been involved in ding a bit of fundraising for H4H and specifically the chaps at Headley. Mainly to buy them stuff like Nintendo Wii's as they are good for rehabillitation and can be used by people who have only one hand or arm.

Link to the Just Giving page http://www.justgiving.com/phersforheadley

[Melchett01]

Yeller - yes they probaby can .... if you actually put your email address down!

I'm not paranoid (honest), but a chum of mine had an account on a blog type site complete with a nomme de pleume that he thought would give a bit of annonymity. Found himself in the boss' office for a 'chat sans cafe' after a cock-up meant that all the account details were published on the site, and his less than complementary comments were not well received by the hierachy.

So all in all, I am a little suspicious given the control freak nature of this govt and the authorities reaction to criticism - things can come back and bite you on the arse if you don't cover it!

[KNG2007]

Two faced or what?

Quote::GORDON Brown
“Help For Heroes gives the public a practical way to demonstrate their support for wounded servicemen and their families.”
But not you or pack half wits broon:mad:

petitions.pm.gov.uk/se...es/#detail (http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/servicecharities/#detail)

[chappie]

:mad: :ugh: :mad: :ugh:

:hmm: here we go AGAIN!!!! AAAARRRGGGHHH!!!!!!
this government just don't get it, do they? god, they make me sick.

have signed and shall dutifully spread the word. i know that the civil servants can't see what the right thing to do is as the pound signs in their eyes must get in the way! :8 surely the world is not full of jobs worths and gutless wonders? tonight i am on a night shift in neuro itu ready and waiting to pick up the bits of tonights merriment and on a daily basis i see the journey that people go on where they come in and have lived with the attitude of well i'm alright jack, then sadly through having to come to us they leave with an awareness of what really matters in life and what goes on around us. this should be the case of the bean counters and desk jockeys in the government that need to see the reality and impact of their decisions, then they might realise that we are not saying /doing this for any other reason than to try and help people.

:D i applaud those of you trying to raise funds, despite the fact that you shouldn't have to.

[KNG2007]

civil servants can't see what the right thing to do is


To busy admiring their art work:E

[heights good]

"If it does then Id rather have some decent NVG goggles and some better flying boots and can we have some decent Nav bags that don't disintegrate after a week?"

NVG Goggles, are they the same as NVG's :}

HG

[KNG2007]

Here is the PQ that sort of exposed this sham. However you will note that for some strange reason he is withholding the detailed costs. :rolleyes:


Nick Harvey: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will provide a break down of the costs charged to the Army Benevolent Fund for the use of the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst on 22, 23 and 24 September 2006 for the Music on Fire event. [163147]

Derek Twigg: Each application for the use of Ministry of Defence land for fund raising or other purposes is considered on its individual merits and an appropriate system of charges is applied. A charge of £7,041.01 was raised against the Army Benevolent Fund (ABF) for the use of the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst, for the Music on Fire Event held in 2006. This total contained VAT of £1,049, commercial insurance of £2,500 and a Defence Estates licence fee of £100. I am withholding a more detailed breakdown of costs as its release would, or would be likely to, prejudice commercial interests. However, the charges reflect an abated figure of the full amount permissible in accordance with Treasury Government accounting rules


Please sign and pass on.;)
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/servicecharities/#detail

[airborne_artist]

NVG Goggles, are they the same as NVG's

They are a bit like PIN numbers, I'm told :ugh:

[Gainesy]

Very similar to SAM missiles I understand.
Signed, bunch of tossers....:mad:

[KNG2007]

Good effort to all, last week it was just above 800

1,741:D

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/servicecharities/#detail

[KNG2007]

1,818 :D
bump
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/servicecharities/#detail

[Chugalug2]

Done and bumped!

[blanketstacker]

Don't understand the jargon (bumped etc) but I have signed the petition.

Having worked for the RAF Ben Fund I am only too well aware that the government and local authorities try to tap charitable resources rather than cough up in accordance with their statutory and moral responsibilities.

[BEagle]

From The Sunday Times
January 6, 2008

‘Penny-pinching’ MoD tells troops to stay at home

David Leppard

TENS of thousands of troops have been quietly told to stay away from their barracks in what military sources say is an attempt by the Ministry of Defence (MoD) to save money on lighting and heating.

The MoD admitted this weekend that the army “across the whole of the UK” had been placed on what was in effect extended leave, running into this week.

Having initially denied that troops had been given extra time off, the MoD later confirmed that tens of thousands had indeed had their two-week Christmas break extended to three weeks.

Patrick Mercer, a Tory MP and former army colonel, said senior officers had told him that the move was a cost-saving measure. He said that up to 40,000 soldiers and officers - nearly half the army - had been given extra time off.

“An order has gone out to commanding officers asking that they encourage people to stay away from barracks to save on the cost of heating and lighting,” Mercer said.

“This is just penny-pinching which will underline the parsimony of this government towards the armed forces. It sends a message to our enemies: don’t invade today because we are on holiday.”

He said that the MoD had officially dressed the move up as a “thank you” to loyal, hard-working troops and officers. But senior commanders had been privately told that its primary purpose was to save money.

Normally troops would have already started their new year training and would be performing regular duties providing back-up at home for troops serving in Iraq, Afghanistan and other overseas operations.

Military sources said that the more radiators, lights, computers, faxes and printers that could be turned off, the better it would be for the budget.
The MoD said that the extra time off was best described as a “stand-down” rather than extra leave. A spokesman said: “This year’s additional stand-down is in recognition of all of the hard work by personnel over the past 12 months.

“This is not primarily a savings measure and, as no base is closed over the Christmas period, any savings would be negligible.”

Last year, in a set-piece speech on his vision for Britain’s armed forces, Tony Blair, then prime minister, said there would be increased spending on equipment and personnel to make the army effective at fighting wars and keeping the peace.

Critics say Gordon Brown has failed to respond. He has promised a 1.5% increase in real annual defence spending over the next three years. But critics say this is inadequate because of the rising cost of equipment and increasing commitments to big military projects; they add that it emphasises a mismatch between Britain’s military ambitions and its actual defence budget.

[Chugalug2]

A new twist to the phrase "home based". Now they can close them all down!


Don't understand the jargon (bumped etc) but I have signed the petition.



Could be the theme for a python sketch, blanketstacker! You bumped without even knowing it. "I believe it refers to taking a thread to the top of a Forum by posting on it, M'Lud, a practise popular among the lower orders!".

[KNG2007]

1,931:D:ok:


http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/servicecharities/#detail

[KNG2007]

Signatures: 2,631

please sign:D

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/servicecharities/#detail

I know that a number of stations will be holding Charity events over the next few months for Help for Heroes. Let's see if we can all help scrap Defence Estates charging for the use of the stations before these events take place. I and others fully understand the need for commercial insurance cover before an event can take place that is just legal common sense but not the charges imposed by Defence Estates after accounts for events have been presented. i.e. demanding 15 per cent of the net profit from the event or the direct costs to the MOD, whichever is the greater.

[interpreter]

As a Royal Air Force officer I spent a couple of weeks at Headley Court in Autumn 1960 and everything was quite superb with the clear objective of getting each and every patient as fit as possible and back to the best of health within the limits of their injuries. The very least we can do for our servicemen and their families is give them first class support and treatment with no reasonable expense spared.

Unfortunately I don't think we have one member of the cabinet who has ever been in the armed forces or who has had to face the enemy.

Nevertheless a similar "row" is raging in the US where there is a commonly held view that once they are back from the Gulf injured or otherwise they unimportant.

Disgusting.

[knotterpaul]

As is the case for so many of us...the most worrying aspect is not being surprised at any of this!
Signed with pleasure....in disgust!

[KNG2007]

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/servicecharities/#detail (http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/servicecharities/#detail)

Signatures: 2,798:D


Defence Estates: Charities

Ann Winterton: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether his Department charges charitable organisations for events held on departmental property; and if he will make a statement. [171346]
Derek Twigg: Under Government Finance Accounting Regulations (Managing Public Money), there are no special arrangements for the treatment of charities, whether service or other. The fact that a charity is to be the main beneficiary of a good or service is not in itself sufficient justification to introduce a special charging regime or to set charges aside. There is the opportunity for abatement of full costs and this decision is on a case-by-case basis taking account of any special circumstances that may apply.
All privately-run events on departmental property, whether charitable or other are required to be covered by public liability insurance. This requirement is passed on to the organiser who is responsible for ensuring that appropriate cover is in place. Where commercial insurance is either not available or only at disproportionate cost, then organisers are charged under a departmental insurance scheme.

[HILF]

Signed & passed on to nearest and dearest.

HILF:ok:

[KNG2007]

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/servicecharities/#detail (http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/servicecharities/#detail)

Please help get this to 3000 before Sunday:D
Signatures: 2,848

[HeliAviator]

Its sooooo... good that our Armed Forces feel under valued by our Governmental. it must be a daily mantra chant around the Cabinet table, when will they ever learn!

Done, dusted and signed with pleasure 2856.

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/servicecharities/#detail (http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/servicecharities/#detail)

[Say again s l o w l y]

I did like the figure that was on the news last night, where it showed that the Government had pumped £55billion into Northern Rock, but that the entire budget for the armed forces last year was £33billion..........

Nice to see they've got their priorities straight.

[KNG2007]

Signatures: 4,483:D
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/servicecharities/#detail (http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/servicecharities/#detail):ok:

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article622810.ece (http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article622810.ece)

[airborne_artist]

where it showed that the Government had pumped £55billion into Northern Rock

Tyneside is solid Labour territory, you must remember :ugh:

[KNG2007]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/nol/newsid_7210000/newsid_7214100/7214159.stm?bw=bb&mp=wm&news=1&ms3=6&ms_javascript=true&nol_storyid=7214159&bbcws=2

The comment about the MOD leaning on charity. :ugh:
Signatures: 4,646
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/servicecharities/#detail

[Odie]

4,676

I'm absolutely stunned by the penny pinching attitude from the corridors of power. :ugh: These fees seem to be generated by those that have no need for the good work done by the charities that many service personnel freely give their time to raise money for. In effect the robbing b:mad:ds are taking money from charities. :=

BTW, first post, so hello everyone. :ok:

[Odie]

4,684. :)

The penny pinching attitudes we've been witness to from the corridors of power gets my goat. :ugh: In spite of all the good efforts of service personnel to raise money for these worthwhile causes, :ok: the robbing b:mad:ds are, in effect, skimming money off the charity. Some events I've heard of have had more money disappear to Land Estates than they've given to the charity. :rolleyes:

[KNG2007]

Signatures: 5,530 bump:D

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/servicecharities/#detail

[rockape2k7]

The e-petition response could be precised to:

... it is not the government's position to take 15%.... we take precisely how much we want... Robbing b:mad:s

As a government they really have lost their way. The acid test IMHO for everything like this is could you imagine them coming up with this Policy :confused: whilein opposition? := And no, I can't.

So it smacks to me that common sense and good decency has been skewed yet again by the traditional civil serpent / Treasury approach to life which, as ever, is based on recognising the cost of everything and the value of nothing. Common sense cannot prevail under those circumstances...

In sum a lazy response to the petition which begs the supplementary question... Why? And the small point that FFS... You are the Governement! You make the rules! Change the stupid things! :ugh::ugh::ugh:

Signed

[KNG2007]

cracking post Rockape. :D

In the end this is just down to common sense and decency. The lifting of such fees would be an extremely easy thing to do and count as a good will gesture towards the good work that forces charity's do that also lifts the burden on the MOD and a gesture towards the very people this government send to do the difficult tasks that it is currently presented with. Its a shame that such a petition has to be raised in the first place

As I have posted before the PM's early response was more than miss-leading. The DE require a licence fee to be paid before the event and before this licence is issued DE requires proof that the organisation has purchased sufficient insurance cover, via a civil legal firm. We all understand that insurance must paid to cover for any eventuality, fair one.
The fee plus TAX for preparing the DE licence ( printing out 5 pieces of A 4 paper after just inserting the organisers name and event into the same text) is just petty.
What is inexcusable is the demanded after the event. It is not by how many people turned up and used the facility's but by how much was raised. This is just day light robbery, no better then the stories we hear about Hoodies who swipe the Poppy tin and run from the old soldier outside Tescos:ugh:

please sign and pass to your friends and other web sites

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/servicecharities/#detail

[KNG2007]

Signatures: 5,597:D

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/servicecharities/#detail

this is why

http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/DefenceNews/DefencePolicyAndBusiness/ModWelcomesHelpForHeroesCharity.htm
:ugh:

[Cherskiy]

Signed as well, with great pleasure.

When the present HMG runs our military right down to the last tank, squaddy, ship and aircraft, who's going to fight their wars for them? ("1st Civil Serpent Grenadier Division"? - the "Crimson Permanent Assurance" short from "The Meaning Of Life" springs to mind....) :eek:

What constitutes minimum defence for the UK, anyway? :confused:

[KNG2007]

Signatures: 5,657:D

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/servicecharities/#detail
The latest spin. :mad:



Departments: Charities

Nick Harvey: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much Defence Estate (Aldershot) billed in liability charges for charity events held on his Department’s property since April 2005 to 2007. [152355]
Derek Twigg: The information requested will need to be collated and this will take a little time. I will write to the hon. Member and a copy of my letter will be placed in the Library of the House.
Substantive answer from Derek Twigg to Nick Harvey:
I undertook to write to you in answer to your Parliamentary Question on 3 September 2007, (Official Report, column 1617W) about the amount Defence Estates (Aldershot) was billed in liability charges for charity events held on his Department’s property since 2005-2007.
I apologise for the delay in writing to you following our meeting on 12 December, which was due to the time required to retrieve and review our available information. Unfortunately, the review has shown that it is not possible to separately identify liability charges for charity events.
I am placing a copy of my letter in the Library of the House.:ugh:

[coldbuffer]

Signed and bumped

[KNG2007]

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/servicecharities/#detail

bump:D

[smnbly]

Signed with pleasure. How much lower can this government drag this country?:(

[Captain Kirk]

An MoD spokeswoman said: “We charge to recover insurance, maintenance and admin fees — and cannot differentiate charities from other organisations.”

WHY???

Insurance: let the event organisers arrange their own insurance.
Admin Fees: to administer the fees levied no doubt, and arrange insurance?!
Maintenance: surely a little in-house joke – it’s barely maintained for our own use!!

A little radical I know, but what is wrong with looking after our own?

Just a guess, but I suspect that the ‘MoD Spokeswoman’ will never have actually served a day in her life.