Baroness prompts FRSB constitutional debate

Fundraising | Celina Ribeiro | 15 Jul 2009

The anger of a Tory peer prompted the FRSB to consider judging non-members, PF can reveal.

Baroness Trumpington wrote to the Fundraising Standards Board weeks ago to complain about the use of coins inside direct mail packs - a technique she describes as "objectionable" - and voiced her concerns in the House of Lords yesterday.

Her comments led Baroness Crawley to warn that self-regulation is under threat if more charities do not demonstrate best practice: "The clock is ticking for self-regulation on these annoying practices," she said.

"Not enough charities are yet demonstrating best practice through becoming members of the Fundraising Standards Board, and if the government have [sic] to bring in a reserve power in 2011, we may well do that," said Baroness Crawley.

Crawley said that the government supports the Institute of Fundraising codes of practice, but reminded the Conservative peer that under the 2006 Charities Act the government can take over regulation of the sector.

Alistair McLean, chief executive of the FRSB, told PF that Trumpington’s complaint was "the straw that broke the camel's back" in terms of the organisation considering changing its constitution to allow it to judge non-members.

McLean said that while direct mail incentives are not in breach of the codes of fundraising practice, there is "great disquiet about the way they are used” and said he believes they can be a “blunt and unpleasant instrument”.

The FRSB chief executive will be writing directly to Baroness Trumpington about her concerns.

The Lords debate comes months after the Institute of Fundraising launched a campaign to have charities report instances of “bad direct mail packs” which induce guilt or have irrelevant incentives.

Directory: Fundraising Standards Board | Institute of Fundraising
Who's Who: Celina Ribeiro

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.