UNICEF's Dodging of Gucci Event Questions Mirrored by German Scandals, Veneman's History
By Matthew Russell Lee 
February 6, 2008
The Inner City Press 
Original Source: http://www.innercitypress.com/un7gucci020608.html
UNITED NATIONS, February 6 -- With UN grounds surrounded by a tall black fence, and private security manning the perimeter ensuring that UN staff and correspondents were thrown out, the Gucci-promoting event half-benefiting an entity that is not even incorporated as a not-for-profit got underway Wednesday night. The UN turned over its land and logo at the request of UNICEF's director Ann Veneman, who unlike Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon was intent on still attending the event. About this, then about a growing scandal about UNICEF's in Germany, Inner City Press asked if Ms. Veneman would be available to answer questions, including on the way in or out of the event.  Inner City Press was repeatedly told she would not answer any questions in this fashion. Rather, two terse written answers were provided, authorized for release by Ms. Veneman herself.
            Amazingly, Veneman answered no to the question, before asking the Secretariat for use of the UN North Lawn, did you or your staff conduct any due diligence on the other beneficiary of the event, including into whether it is a 501(c)3 non-profit organization and the use of funds?  No, was the answer. Earlier in the day, Inner City Press had sought clarification of this lack of due diligence, using the hyperbolic question, What if the other beneficiary were Al Qaeda? The answer was that it wouldn't make any difference to UNICEF. An offer of funding was made to UNICEF and they took it, and used the power of their brand to convince the UN Secretariat to cede control over the UN's land, and brand, to Gucci.
            Gucci very quickly – HYPERLINK http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:53H-FXT0B1QJ:www.unicefusa.org/site/apps/nl/content2.asp?c=duLRI8O0H&b=33260&ct=4958993+%22will+celebrate+the+opening+of+Gucci's+New+York+5th+Avenue+Flagship+store.%22&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=3&gl=us&client=firef said that the event was to celebrate the opening of Gucci's New York 5th Avenue Flagship store and this offensive claim was trumpeted from the website of the US Fund for UNICEF. 
            Why did UNICEF allow it? While UNICEF argues that to stop this exploitation of the UN was the job of the UN's Office of Legal Affairs or of the US Fund for UNICEF, since it was UNICEF and its directly Ann Veneman which requested the use of the UN's North Lawn and stood to make money from its use, UNICEF had a responsibility to act. Why didn't it? While UNICEF seems to believe that its staffers have no right to an opinion, several insiders tell Inner City Press the director Veneman is enamored with celebrity, and thus with association with this event.
            Strangely or perhaps tellingly, an online http://www.pprune.org/forums/archive/index.php/t-65795.html site about airline passengers with senses of entitlement reports that Anne Veneman (former US Secretary of Agriculture) [was] very mean and rude as was her security detail. She demanded Pepsi when we only had Coke, and she stated that she made the request for Pepsi to be on board when she made the reservation.
            During her tenure as Agriculture Secretary -- she still prefers to be called the honorific Secretary rather than her UNICEF title -- Ms. Veneman oversaw scandals concerning mad cow disease. Before that she worked for the corporate law and lobbying firm Patton Boggs.  In the process of being http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0429/p07s01-wogi.html placed at UNICEF by President Bush in 2005, Ms. Veneman was asked if she would continue to emphasize primary and secondary education for girls. 'I don't come with any broad agenda with regard to those or any other social issue,' she said. 'I don't believe these issues are relevant to the mission of UNICEF.' But a glitzy auction and dinner of wild striped bass and seared salmon celebrating the opening of a Gucci store on Fifth Avenue is relevant to the mission of UNICEF?

Ann Veneman in the Bush administration: Q&A then, not http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,3111092,00.html now
            The second of her terse written answers belated acknowledged that Gucci's statement was not in keeping with our understanding of the nature and purpose of the event, and this was communicated to the organizers. Written follow-up questions about how, when and to whom this was communicated have yet to be answered. While Veneman managed to avoid any Q&A in the run-up to Wednesday's misconceived Gucci-fest, thus undermining the import of any after-provided answers, it seems clear that Veneman will have to take questions, herself, about the growing scandal surrounding her agency in Germany. Click http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,3111092,00.html here for Deutsche Welle's article entitled Donors Flee, Criticisms Mount Amid Germany's UNICEF Crisis.
    Already the national chairwoman of UNICEF Germany, Heidi Simonis, quit in protest this month after blowing the whistle late last year on the alleged waste of donor funds collected by the body. Tellingly, mainstream critics point out that UNICEF's Dietrich Garlichs is simultaneously the chief of UNICEF Germany and also sits on its supervisory board. Can you say, conflict of interest? But at the recent opening of UNICEF's Executive Board meeting here, which few other journalists attended much less covered, Inner City Press waited to see if issues of audit availability to member states, or safeguards and rules for corporate partnerships, or the brewing Germany scandal would be addressed -- none were. Now even German Chancellor Angela Merkel has joined the call for action on UNICEF's mismanagement. And where is Ann Veneman? Partying with Madonna, Ton Cruise and Donald Trump and refusing to appear at a press availability and take any questions. We'll see.