Saxton spearheads lobby effort for lottery reform
9 Feb 2012
A group of charity and lottery company representatives have agreed to work on a plan to push for reform...
Share
New website attacks government-funded charities
A new website, fakecharities.org, has been created to highlight those charities which receive state funding and which the site’s creator alleges support the government.
Charities listed include Age Concern, which is described as "applauding government initiatives with £2m of public money", 4Children, "a glorified quango", and Action on Smoking and Health (ASH), "the original fake charity, formed by the government in 1971".
Other charities listed include RSPB, Christian Aid and Stonewall.
The site is from the writer of the Devil’s Kitchen Blog, who in explaining their motives, says: "These fake fucking charities are springing up left, right and centre: see a pro-state charity quoted in the MSM and the odds are that the ‘charity’ is, in fact, little more than a quango."
"This fake charity will derive a large part of their funds - our money - from the government whose measures it is supporting."
Charities hit back
A spokesman for Age Concern denied that accepting money from government inhibits its ability to speak out for older people.
"This has been clearly demonstrated in our recent advocacy work criticising the Government's failure to address increasing fuel poverty and the scandalous state of the social care system."
A spokeswoman for the Internet Watch Foundation, which the website argues is using EU funds to encourage state regulation of the internet, said its EU funding is spent on a hotline for the public to report illegal online content.
"Over 75 per cent of our funding comes from the internet industry, as you would expect from a self-regulatory body."
"We don’t fundraise so we’re not a charity in that sense; the decision to apply for charitable status was more about making sure we are accountable."
A spokeswoman for Alcohol Concern said none of its government grant is used on its lobbying activities.
"There’s no consideration in terms of being critical of government when thinking about funding."
"We are primarily a lobbying charity, we don’t really do public awareness, and if the fact that we get a grant mattered to the work we do we wouldn’t be able to do it."
Place a comment
Andy
4 Oct 2010
Now we see the REAL reason charities have been bought ; david Cameron's pet project ( not really his ) The Big Society, which is actually an UNelected group of 'social entrepreneurs' (social engineers).
Governments change but the BIG agenda remains the same.
David Vaughan
3 Mar 2009
Notwithstanding the fruity language, it seems to me this site has put its finger on something important.
Charities and government have been getting rather cosy in recent years. In many cases charities have clearly become an arm of government, and work to implement government policy.
This is undemocratic and unfair, and that's putting it mildly.
Anonymous
1 Mar 2009
http://devilskitchen.me.uk/2009/02/lobbyists-fight-back.html
Game, set and match, I think.
Joan
denty@yahoo.com
1 Mar 2009
Stop smoking charity recieves just fraction of their cash from donations.
ASH's accounts for 2007/08 show that it received £191,000 from the Department of Health, £339,120 from "supporting charities" and £65,242 from ASH International (part-funded by Pfizer). It received just £16,332 from voluntary donations.
Carrie W.
1 Mar 2009
After reading this article, I have decided to send a link to everyone I know and ask them to do the same.
I have requested that they never donate another penny to a charity that is funded by the taxpayer.
Why pay twice?
Jonathan Dickson
MYOB
JDC
1 Mar 2009
The rebuttals are hardly convincing, are they. The charities mentioned are oBVIOUSLY fake, in that they do not rely on charitable donations for their funding. Thank you for pointing the way to the excellent blog, Devil's Kitchen. I will be reading it daily, henceforth.
JD.
NO TO LISBON MEANS NO TO LISBON!
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=38059363467&ref=mf
Anonymous
28 Feb 2009
Any charities that receive "government funding" (in reality taxpayer funding) should lose their charitable status.
Sebastian Weetabix
27 Feb 2009
Any "charity" which cannot survive on public donations alone is clearly not valued by the public. I resent my tax money being given to this leaches on the body politic.
Hopefully as a result of this economic depression these bodies will no longer be funded & we won't have to endure the irritation of compulsorily funding the stormtroopers of the Nanny State.
FrancisT
27 Feb 2009
The comment from Enrico worries me. Apart from his apparent native ability to speak jargon there is the total misunderstanding of what a charity is supposed to do.
If a charity gets its funding from the government then it is effectively a part of the government just as local councils, police authorities etc are. All it is doing is acting as the outsourcing partner for a government that is thus able to hide a number of employees from the public view.
In particular charities that lobby government have a clear conflict of interest when the mjaority of their funding comes from providing public services with government funds.
Jeff
27 Feb 2009
"A spokeswoman for Alcohol Concern said none of its government grant is used on its lobbying activities."
Unless "Alcohol Concern" spends less than about £5000 (its total of donations from the public) on lobbying the government that's a somewhat disengenuous statement.
To quote another blogger, "Bishop Hill" - "They don't seem to get the point do they? If nobody is willing to fund your charity on a voluntary basis, that's because nobody values what you do. In fact, most people would probably say that Alcohol Concern is a public menace existing largely for the benefit of its staff."
It is absurd to class as charities, organisations that are government-funded in order to pressurise the government into passing restrictive and unpopular legislation.
A Danials
27 Feb 2009
Once I got past your 'duff link' (reprehensable) to the fake charities site and read some of the info, I have to say I am in agreement with the Devils Kitchen
Michael
27 Feb 2009
"A spokeswoman for Alcohol Concern said none of its government grant is used on its lobbying activities."
Alcohol Concern received £4,991 in donations in 07/08, while it received £515,000 from the Department of Health.
So what did they do with the half a million pounds then if it was used on its lobbying activites?
If you think that isn't a fake charity then you need your head seen to.
Rob Fisher
27 Feb 2009
I don't think DK's argument is "charities accept government money therefore they can't do their jobs properly".
Rather, the arguments are that a) if people aren't paying voluntarily then they don't care about your cause and you shouldn't be lobbying the government for it and b) since the government uses lobbying charities to justify legislation it looks suspiciously like the government is paying for the lobbying it wants.
Dick Puddlecote
27 Feb 2009
Really surprised that you are highlighting this, but very pleased.
It's wrong, pure and simple, and damages the reputations of charities that don't get state funding.
Alcohol Concern quite simply wouldn't exist without government money. ASH employ 17 people on just over £10k public donations.
That is not a charity, therefore is fake.
Stumbleupon
New Labour Victim
Freedom from Leftofascists
27 Feb 2009
Enrico: "as society faces ever-greater social pressures in the wake of the widescale failure of free market principles in certain sectors, the support of charity will become ever more fundamental to the wellbeing of the public."
Very revealing of a political agenda. Your second paragraph is a masterpiece of obfuscation and pompous priggery.
It is crystal clear that many of the fake charities are covert left wing vehicles for promoting social revolution beneficial to vested interest minorities and getting taxpayers to pay for it.
Harry
27 Feb 2009
Any charity which (a) lobbies government over social issues and (b) takes government money to do so is really not a charity, but a QUANGOiof the worst kind.
Take ASH for example - a bunch of nasty little health fascists whose salaries are paid for by smokers.
IF there was real support for the fake charities, the public would support them.
Dr Nick Ashley
Consultant
26 Feb 2009
I'm with the Devil's Kitchen (who is a swear blogger BTW) on this one. Charities should not receive any government money. They should raise funds from the public and other donors.
Too many seem to back up government pronouncements in areas that they cover. They do seem quite often to be spouting the government line.
Anonymous
25 Feb 2009
I don't think there is any need to include the 'fucking' reference, I think a 'f***ing' would do.
Enrico
25 Feb 2009
The writer clearly values hyperbole and self- promoting controversy over a considered understanding of the legal requirements surrounding charitable status and registration.
It is perfectly legitimate for charities to deliver public services if it is a legitimate means of promoting their charitable purposes. As the funding paradigm has shifted from traditional public fundraising sources to income derived through service delivery, charities have to adapt their scope of operations to ensure they can continue to deliver their public benefit.
Clear legal guidance setting out the parameters within which charities can deliver services using state funding are set out in the Charity Commission publication, 'Charities and Public Service Delivery' (CC37), and a more in-depth consideration of the legal issues can be found in 'The Independence of Charities from the State' (RR7) - the person in question may like to digest these before making further misguided assertions.
An expected retort might be something in the vein of: "Well of course that is the usual smokescreen", or "Do they practice what they preach" etc? But the reality is that charities do, and as society faces ever-greater social pressures in the wake of the widescale failure of free market principles in certain sectors, the support of charity will become ever more fundamental to the wellbeing of the public.
Tags
People give with their hearts, not their heads, warns top economist
8 Feb 2012
Charities should be wary of regaling donors with too many facts and figures about the impact of their...
United Way-style matchmaking service to launch in London
8 Feb 2012
London Voluntary Service Council plans to use the money it won from the Transforming Local Infrastructure...
London Mayor opens social enterprise support centre
9 Feb 2012
A new headquarters and hub for social enterprise support organisations has officially opened in London...
Christian Aid dumps head of fundraising role
8 Feb 2012
Christian Aid has “disestablished” its head of fundraising role as part of a new approach to fundraising...
Health committee recommends joined-up social care commissioning
8 Feb 2012
The key to securing better outcomes for older people and other vulnerable groups is joined-up services,...
Wellcome Trust to give employees more choice over IT devices
9 Feb 2012
The Wellcome Trust plans to give its employees more choice over the type of device they use for work.
Animal charity shifts fundraising priority from legacies to online
6 Feb 2012
An East Sussex-based animal welfare charity has launched a new website in a bid to increase online donations...
4Children reveals new website
31 Jan 2012
4Children has launched its new website to provide clearer information about its work and campaigns as...
Join the discussion
RICHARDSONJerry29
IT support
ERT
11 Oct 2010
Every one admits that life seems to be not cheap, but different people require money for various issues and not every man earns enough money. Thus to get good short term loan would be a correct way out.
[Reply]