Hind and Leather defend schools decision in letter to MPs 1

Finance | Tania Mason | 12 Aug 2009

The Charity Commission has fired off a letter to all MPs and peers to remind them that it was parliament that created the public benefit requirement and not the Commission, in the wake of the recent media backlash against the failure of two independent schools to pass the public benefit test.

The letter, from the Commission’s chair Dame Suzi Leather (pictured) and chief executive Andrew Hind, begins: “You may have seen some media coverage recently regarding the Charity Commission’s public benefit assessments of 12 charities including some independent schools.

“Some of the coverage has been somewhat misleading, so we wanted to give our key stakeholders some information and the opportunity to ask any questions you may have. Mindful of our accountability to parliament, we have also contacted all MPs and peers in a similar vein.”

It goes on to remind recipients that it was parliament, in passing the Charities Act 2006, that created the public benefit test that all charities, not just schools, must now pass.

And it seeks to defend the Commission’s actions on its initial public benefit assessments, including the decision to fail the two schools: “The key point about the public benefit test is that, whilst it is based in charity law, it’s actually very close to what the public expect from charities.

“Many polls have shown that the public have a very straightforward view of what charity is all about, and that is providing for people in need. This is the primary role of the Charity Commission as a regulator – to maintain public trust and confidence in charity.

“The Charity Commission has a long history of making decisions independently, transparently and impartially, based on the legal framework within which we are required to operate. That is exactly what we are doing now.”

Separately, this week the Independent Schools Council threatened to take legal action against the Commission's interpretation of the Charities Act on public benefit, as a last resort.

Directory: Charity Commission
Who's Who: Tania Mason

Place a comment

D S Tallon
12 Aug 2009

Leathers and Hinds' letter ignores the fact that the change of definition in the Charities Act was Party political and their justification on tax grounds was wrong.

Education whether public or private is VAT exempt. It means you don't have to charge it for your services. But it also means you cannot recover it on your costs. It has nothing to do with charitable status.

[Reply]

Comments

[Cancel] | Reply to:

Name *

Email *

Organisation

Job Title

Comments *

Verification *

* Please read our Community Standards

Close »

Community Standards

The civilsociety.co.uk community and comments board is intended as a platform for informed and civilised debate.

We hope to encourage a broad range of views, however, there are standards that we expect commentators to uphold. We reserve the right to delete or amend any comments that do not adhere to these standards.

We welcome:

Robust but respectful debate
Strongly held opinions
Intelligent relevant discussion
The sharing of relevant experiences
New participants

We will not publish:

Rude, threatening, offensive, obscene or abusive language, or links to such material
Links to commercial organisations or spam postings. The comments board is not an advertising platform
The posting of contact details for yourself or others
Comments intended for malicious purpose or mindless abuse
Comments purporting to be from another person or organisation under false pretences
Gratuitous criticism, commentary or self-promotion
Any material which breaches copyright or privacy laws, or could be considered libellous
The use of the comments board for the pursuit or extension of personal disputes

Be aware:

Views expressed on the comments board are left at users’ discretion and are in no way views held or supported by Civil Society Media
Comments left by others may not be accurate, do not rely on them as fact
You may be misunderstood - sarcasm and humour can easily be taken out of context, try to be clear

Please:

Enjoy the opportunity to express your opinion and respect the right of others to express theirs
Confine your remarks to issues rather than personalities

Together we can keep our community a polite, respectful and intelligent platform for discussion.