House of Commons Public Administration Select Committee Regulation of the Charitable Sector and the Charities Act 2006
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
House of Commons Public Administration Select Committee Regulation of the Charitable Sector and the Charities Act 2006 Written Evidence List of written evidence CH 01 [Rachel Wellman] CH 02 [Simon Cramp] CH 03 [Action on Smoking and Health] CH 04 [Sheila McKechnie Foundation] CH 05 [CIFAS] CH 06 [Sussex Village Halls Advisory Group] CH 07 [Hospital Broadcasting Association (HBA)]] CH 08 [Local Government Association] CH 09 [War on Want] CH 10 [Baptist Union of Great Britain] CH 11 [New West End Company (NWEC)] CH 12 [HCA International] CH 13 [Sport plus Recreation Alliance] CH 14 [British Heart Foundation] CH 15 [Help the Hospices] CH 16 [Wellcome Trust] CH 17 [Self Help Group (SHG)] CH 18 [Independent Schools Council] CH 19 [Institute of Fundraising (IOF), Fundraising Standards Board (FRSB), Public Fundraising Regulatory Association (PFRA)] CH 20 [Public Fundraising Regulatory Association (PFRA)] CH 21 [Plymouth Brethren Christian Church] CH 22 [Charity Retail Association] CH 23 [UNISON] CH 24 [Charity Law Association (CLA)] CH 25 [Farrer & Co.] CH 26 [The Christian Institute] CH 27 [Scottish Council of Independent Schools] CH 28 [Churches’ Legislation Advisory Service] CH 29 [National Council of Voluntary Organisations (NCVO)] CH 30 [Institute of Fundraising (IOF)] CH 31 [Charity Finance Group (CFG)] CH 32 [Charities Aid Foundation (CAF)] CH 33 [Association for Charities (AfC)] CH 34 [Bates, Wells and Braithwaite] CH 35 [Fundraising Standards Board (FRSB)] CH 36 [British Red Cross] CH 37 [Nikki Brooker] CH 38 [Panel on the Independence of the Voluntary Sector] CH 39 [Charity Commission] CH 40 [NAVCA] CH 41 [Call to Action Progress Group] CH 42 [Caroline Aldiss] CH 43 [IoF Additional evidence] CH 44 [Lewis Smith] CH 45 [Louisa Hutchinson] CH 46 [Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission Taskforce] CH 47 [D R Orbison] CH 48 [Addition written evidence submitted by the Charity Commission] CH 49 [Marcus Anderson] CH 50 [Lord Hodgson] CH 51 [Plymouth Brethren Christian Church] CH 52 [Clothes Aid (Services) Ltd] Written evidence submitted by Rachel Wellman (CH 01) 1. To what extent has the Charities Act 2006 achieved its intended effects of: b. improving the regulation of charity fundraising, and reducing regulation on the sector, especially for smaller charities? It would be more useful if it introduced a de minimis threshold into the definition of 'commercial participator'. Currently small businesses that wish to raise a few hundred pounds for charities cannot legally do so as the amount they raise is too small for it to be worth the charity's time in preparing an agreement with them. Alternatively the requirement to have a written signed agreement could be replaced by the requirement to have the charity's written consent (which could be by email). Then charities could choose whether to require a written agreement or just grant consent conditional on complying with terms that are sent or set out on their website. Charities should be permitted to develop a 'Raising Money for X Charity' logo that they can let any supporters use for free so that they do not have to charge their commercial participator VAT on their donations. The rules on charity raffles should be changed so that all lotteries below a certain size where all profits go to charity can be held without a licence, rather than just those raffles that are held at a non-commercial event. c. providing a clear definition of charity, with an emphasis on public benefit? The requirement for trustees to state in their report that a charity acts for the public benefit and they have had regard to the charity commission's guidance should be dropped as it leads to charities whose public benefit is obvious e.g. cancer research adding a pointless section to their report. 2. What should be the key functions of the Charity Commission? Providing guidance on best practice without fettering trustees' discretion. For example, the length of time a trustee can serve should not be limited by law - this proposal would put off people setting up family foundations that are funded entirely from their private income as after less than a decade they could not carry on running them. Such rules assume that all charities are the same and what is right for one is necessarily right for another. No-one has told Richard Branson to stop running Virgin because he has been doing it for more than 9 years - yet Lord Hodgson suggests limiting trustees' terms to nine years. Instead the Commission should continue to offer advice and guidance on succession planning etc. Provided they are using their resources for charitable purposes and are transparent and accountable, trustees should have freedom to run the charity as they think fit. 3. How should the Charity Commission be funded? 4. Is the current threshold for registration with the Charity Commission set at an appropriate level? Small charities should be entitled to register if they wish to - many rely on such registration as a sign they are a legitimate charity. Alternatively, HMRC registration of charities should be made more widely known and publicised so that when a small charity registers with HMRC they can use their HMRC reference number to demonstrate they are a legitimate charity. 5. How valid are concerns that there are too many charities? Not valid - the number of charities is dependent on the number of people and organisations wanting to do something for the greater good - the more people that want to do that the better. The 'free market' of donor support will determine which charities continue. August 2012 Written evidence submitted by Simon Cramp (CH 02) Please see below my submission on this important inquiry. My name is Simon Cramp and I have three disabilities principally a learning disability and I have served on a board and gone to conferences that change the rules between 1998 to 2010 and for Mencap was a key player in changing the rules on involving people with a learning disability in the decision making process. And I hope within this submission I can give life experience of some of the issues trustees or company directors have to understand to act within the law. Now I will address the questions you have asked. Question 1 To what extent has the Charities Act 2006 achieved its intended effects of: a. enabling charities to administer themselves more efficiently and be more effective? But your first question is interesting but what does the charity commission offer. If things are going to be online only there are issues that not everyone has a computer with the country finances and people’s income being very tight then it could become a problem. As people with learning disabilities and dyslexia and dyspraxia find it difficult to read stuff online as I have found it difficult in the 15 years I served as a trustee/company director. The other area I like to say apart from the first time you resigster with the charity commission no one really asked or get in touch with the charity and company if it also comes under the Companies Act 1992 1993 where incorporated is a must because it ran as business where it over. Question 2. What should be the key functions of the Charity Commission? Question 3. How should the Charity Commission be funded? The state and the Home Office should give more money to it if the present government policy the big society is to work. Personally I think the big society is half baked and unworkable. Question 4. Is the current threshold for registration with the Charity Commission set at an appropriate level? No for the reason I give in question 1. Question 5. How valid are concerns that there are too many charities? It depends how you define too many charities may yes if you didn’t have a school or hospital as a charity without much look over the books or it raise to government say a hospital is not function because it has no money . Then the Hodgson Review comes into play. Question 6. Exempt charities, such as academy schools, are regulated by principal regulators, rather than the Charity Commission. How well is this system working? No should not be exempt charities government or educational authority should not be allowed or department of education should not allow another wish washy policy by the Tories to allow schools to opt out local authority control so if there is a problem there is no comeback. Sorry I am someone who believes the state should provide schooling, hospitals and other things that Bevan provided for the country with the NHS in 1948. Finally, I am not against change but I do worry that things are being stretched lays for this like a school becoming a sixth form college and other things what happen to the simple thing. That charity begins at home. August 2012 Written evidence submitted by Action on Smoking and Health (ASH) (CH 03) 1. ASH is submitting this note in response to the call for evidence by the Public Administration Select Committee as part of its inquiry into the impact and implementation of the 2006 Charities Act. 2. We wish to respond to two important questions posed by the Committee, specifically: • Q1c To what extent has the Charities Act 2006 achieved its intended effect(s) of providing a clear definition of charity, with an emphasis on public benefit? • Q10 Are the rules around political activity by charities reasonable and proportionate? 3. We also note that the Committee’s questions and issues paper quotes a report from the Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA), published in 2012, which “criticised campaigning by charities receiving income from the state”.