Trustee Exchange 2012
22 Feb 2012
Share
What is the public collections regime and why should Nick Hurd care?
Speaking at the Institute of Fundraising conference 'Ready for the recovery?', the shadow minister for charities, social enterprise and volunteering Nick Hurd laid out three areas that a new Conservative government would help the voluntary sector.
Cutting bureaucracy, supporting innovative service delivery and building a culture of giving by mending “broken Britain” sound like a broad policy most could support. He dropped in stats to back up his arguments and tackled the issue of gift aid with such deft vagueness that the sector press diverge in their reporting:
Civil Society Fundraising - More givers, not gift aid reform, first step for Tory government
Third Sector - Gift Aid reform is top of Conservative agenda
UK Fundraising - Gift Aid 'inefficient and too expensive' says Nick Hurd
As reported by Civil Society, in the Q & A session I asked a quite pointed question: how much of a priority will the implementation of the public collection regime be to a new Conservative government? To his credit he didn’t try to hide his ignorance, pleaded a heavy workload and asked me to send through a briefing. By Friday lunchtime the PFRA secretariat had a briefing in his inbox and will follow up to ensure the information is understood. In hindsight, I doubt whether many of the conference attendees understood my question or its relevance.
So it is only fair that I share the briefing with you. If your charity or agency recruits donors or collects cash in the public domain, including on the doorstep, then this affects you. The briefings (see attachments below) are pretty precise so I will give you a potted layman’s review and for more detailed background point you to the PFRA website.
While the perception amongst some is that 'Chuggers are everywhere', claiming that they are 'collared by the same people every day of the week, wearing different charity jackets every day', the reality is very different. Some areas of the country have high levels of fundraising, others low level and in places like Birmingham, the council won’t allow face-to-face fundraising at all.
The laws that affect face-to-face fundraising on the street or doorstep are in the process of being updated. With regard to public collections the 2006 Charities Act is based on acceptance and facilitation. The Police, Factories etc (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1916 (fundraising in public) and the House to House Collections Act 1939 (fundraising on the doorstep) were based on suspicion and restriction – they aimed to stop bogus fundraising but not to regulate legitimate activity.
Under the new Act, the onus of permitting fundraising will be taken away from local authorities and given to the Charity Commission. With potentially hundreds of thousands of charities in England and Wales who could apply for the right to fundraise, this poses a challenge for the Charity Commission. The Office of the Third Sector have commissioned a study by Modena Consulting to propose costed solutions.
In the meantime, local authorities across England and Wales are left to interpret the law as they choose. This leads to pockets of activity and the perception of saturation, something that will change with the implementation of the public collections regime.
Currently in London, the Metropolitan Police have the regulatory authority and their current interpretation of the law is that a direct debit cannot be seen as cash and that the 1916 Act doesn’t apply. Implementation of the collection regime will give local authorities in London the power to facilitate face-to-face and have a say on where and how often, but not to ban.
Arguably, the new regime could see less face-to-face fundraising in London and more in other large cities. This will be a challenge for anyone who focuses their fundraising activity in London and could change the perception of face-to-face for the better or worse.
The government is obliged to review statutory laws after five years so the 2006 Charities Act is not far off of a review. The post-election government will have a role to play in pushing for the implementation of the regime if they see that as a priority, but between now and the election the PFRA is waiting with eagerness to see the findings from Modena. This is an ongoing issue that needs sorting. Face-to-face fundraising is an established form of fundraising with a policed code of practice. Charities and the public deserve consistency in the law when asking or being asked for a donation.
To quote Mick Aldridge, chief executive of the PFRA: "With the general election coming we expected - and are quite relaxed about - a delay in implementing this part of the Act. But we expect the next government to make sure the new licensing regime is enacted as a matter of urgency.
"It would be disastrous if the new administration let this Act go the same way as its predecessor in 1992 - which also contained a new licensing framework that was never enacted - because, to be frank, current licensing arrangements are a bit of a dog's dinner, disliked by charities and local authorities alike."
Rowena Lewis
Head of Fundraising and Development
The Fawcett Society
10 Feb 2010
I plead ignorance alongside Nick Hurd, but then again, I’m not the shadow minister for charities... I wasn’t aware that local authorities could ban street fundraising. What about the people of Birmingham who would be inclined to give to charity in the street – do they have a say in the ban?
It sounds as if proposals under the new act could do much to regulate street fundraising and collections. But how would a conservative government interpret the opportunity for reform? Would they adopt these proposals or follow Birmingham’s lead?
[Reply]