New on our blog
Greenpeace Environmental Trust
STRONG REPORTING FROM RAINBOW WARRIORA single staff member runs this, Greenpeace's charity wing (Greenpeace itself is not a charity). In 2007, it dished out £2.7 million in grants, primarily to Greenpeace projects, but also to other organizations involved in environmental work around the world. With money coming in faster than it can be given out, the charity plans to spend its large reserves by giving more to projects in poor countries. The annual report is a good effort and provides a decent insight into the various projects the charity funds. Are you from this charity? Have your say.
But don't just take our word for it...
 visit the charity's donation page Reviewed: 2009-03-05 Accounts ending: 2007-12-31
|
IN SHORTWho/what it helps
Where
Providing
| ||||||||||||||||
66 % 
Medium 
Under £60k 
Unknown 
Email this page
Print this pageReader's comments
I have heard that Greenpiece is not a charity so why are Street fundraisers (Chuggers) collecting for Greenpiece? Are chuggers collection for a political pressure group? Why are they telling everyone they are collecting for this charity when this is not a charity. More chugger lies?
You're right Anonymous911 - Greenpeace isn't itself a charity because its campaigning work is seen as too controversial. However, Greenpeace also has a separate charitable branch - Greenpeace Environmental Trust - which promotes environmental research and education projects. The 96% spent on charitable activities on our profile refers to the charity, not the whole organization.
You can find out more about Greenpeace Environment Trust here, or read about what we've said about campaigning organizations like Greenpeace.
Sarah, Intelligent Giving
Hmmm... How can we get to this number, if Greenpeace is not a charity, then there would be a tax cut of about 28%..
and after the cut 96% is still left?
Confused.
Greenpeace actions and actual costs? A few rubber boats, reporting about research made by OTHERS, and voluntary young radical environmental people working mostly for free..
Ok. they need to print a few flags and flyers.
Still not convinced. Cannot really see where all the money goes.
If Greenpeace its not a charity, it is likely to be some sort of company, does this company then pay a nice "dividend" to its leader... ?
1. They were collecting for the Greenpeace Environmental Trust (which is a charity) rather than for Greenpeace itself.
2. They were collecting for Greenpeace but did not claim that it was a charity. There's nothing (other than local authority regulations) to stop anyone trying to sign people up in the street for a political pressure group.
3. They were collecting for Greenpeace itself rather than the trust, claimed when you spoke to them that it was a charity, and were therefore (deliberately or through inadequate training) lying.
Did you actually stop and talk to them for long enough to establish which of these was the case?