Crime prevention charity will challenge rate relief decision
17 May 2013
The Public Safety Charitable Trust plans to appeal this week’s High Court ruling that it cannot claim...
Sorry for interrupting, but there is something we need to tell you...
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.
If you wish to restrict or block web browser cookies which are set on your device then you can do this through your browser settings, the Help function within your browser will tell you how.
The NCVO has changed its position on the lobbying register, and now says charities should not be compelled to be on it.
The umbrella body’s chief executive Sir Stuart Etherington will tell delegates at a Hansard Society event tonight that the government’s final proposal for the register has been watered down so much in the face of feedback by private-sector interests, that the NCVO no longer thinks charities should be subject to it.
Ahead of tonight’s speech, Sir Stuart told civilsociety.co.uk that when the initial plans for the register were first proposed, it was intended to apply to internal lobbyists as well as external ones, and the NCVO felt it would be unfair if charities were not also covered by it. “You couldn’t have one rule for us and one for everyone else,” he said.
But the latest draft, now out for consultation, no longer requires internal private-sector lobbyists to register. If this is the course of action that the government adopts then the NCVO says that charities should not be captured by it.
"Basically it’s so weak now there’s no point in us joining it," he said. "This register brings the private sector up to the level of charities and in-house lobbyists level of transparency, by making clear who they represent - but the proposals do not add anything additional for charities."
He will tell delegates tonight that the key point is the purpose of the register. "If the purpose is merely to ensure transparency for multi-client agencies there is no rationale for charities to be part of it," he will say. "If the purpose of the register is to inform the public of who is influencing policy, then in-house lobbyists, including charities, should be included."
The change of heart brings NCVO into line with the position advocated by Bates Wells & Braithwaite lawyer Rosamund McCarthy last week. McCarthy argued that charities are already transparent in their dealings with ministers and that requiring them to join such a register would dissuade many from interacting with government.
The NCVO has set out four criteria which it says must be met if charities are to be subject to a statutory register. These are:
Universality – the system should apply to all lobbyists, regardless of sector.
Legislative footprint – the most useful part of future legislation would be to identify the issues lobbied on. This would enable the public to understand how policy has evolved through discussion with external parties.
A code of conduct – this should set out clear expectations outlining how outside interests should interact with government. This would act as a powerful nudge, driving standards up across the board.
Proportionate - any system should be proportionate, inexpensive and easy to administer.
Charlotte Stuffins
NCVO
2 Mar 2012
NCVO believes that the scope of the Government’s proposals is too narrow.
NCVO has not performed a ‘U-turn’ on this issue; indeed we have long supported transparency for all lobbying activity by all sectors. As reported in this article, NCVO has decided to shift its position in terms of supporting the Government’s proposed register.
Our view is that the Government has missed an opportunity to increase transparency, level the playing field between multi-client consultancies, in-house lobbyists and charities, and to drive-up standards across the board.
As it currently stands, the purpose of the register appears to merely ensure transparency for multi-client consultancies.
So, as articulated above, NCVO sees no reason for the inclusion of charities in the proposed register because such an action would not add anything to overall transparency and accountability of lobbying activity.
To clarify, it is the Government, not NCVO, who have suggested the creation of a register purely of consultancies. As stated above, NCVO sees this is as a weak document.
Lastly, NCVO is speaking on behalf of the charity sector as a whole. Charities, on the whole, enjoy high levels of transparent practice in line with the regulations set by the Charity Commission.
Stolen
2 Mar 2012
Response to [Charlotte Stuffins]
"Lastly, NCVO is speaking on behalf of the charity sector as a whole."
Please evidence.
Carl Allen
29 Feb 2012
We set our standards in and for the sector. That they are higher than those of other sectors is never a reason to lower them.
What is the much trumpeted independent nature of the sector about if we begin to compare ourselves in such a way?
Carl Allen
1 Mar 2012
Response to [Carl Allen]
It is an interesting take/case on culture versus strategy.
Bad strategy is my opinion.
Simon Francis
29 Feb 2012
It is utterly incomprehensible to argue that somehow charities and in-house teams be exempt from any lobbying guidelines, while agencies are covered.
And the idea that in-house teams or charities are 100% transparent in dealings with politicians is utter nonsense. Do all charities record the work of all their supporters or members and publish that? What about the conversations charity-employed Parliamentary pass-holders have behind closed doors?
The reality is that any media or community-based campaigning, letter writing campaigns or petition launches are within the definition of lobbying.
Hopefully Sir Stuart's intervention will re-ignite the debate as to if a compulsory register is such a good idea in the first place.
If you believe that all lobbying should be registered, public affairs and public relations takes a step further towards being a regulated profession. And that is very worrying news indeed.
Francis Ingham
Chief Executive
PRCA
29 Feb 2012
Sir Stuart Etherington is correct to condemn the government’s apparent desire to exempt in-house communications teams from its register of lobbyists. A register will be effective only if it is universal, and provides no one type of lobbyists with special treatment.
But NCVO is absolutely wrong to match the government’s U-turn with one of their own. Rather than now making a case also to exempt charities, they should be making the case to expand the number of people who have to sign up. There is no argument for creating a register purely of consultancies –that largely exists already via the voluntary registers that the PRCA and others run. It is time that charities embraced those same levels of transparency.
17 May 2013
The Public Safety Charitable Trust plans to appeal this week’s High Court ruling that it cannot claim...
17 May 2013
The Cabinet Office’s Centre for Social Impact Bonds has developed two new tools to assist the development...
17 May 2013
The Financial Reporting Council, which oversees financial reporting in the UK and Ireland, yesterday agreed...
17 May 2013
The Independent Commission for Aid Impact has called on the Department for International Development to...
16 May 2013
The National Lottery turned over just shy of £7bn last financial year, another record year for the operator...
16 May 2013
The government has rejected the Legal Services Board’s recommendation that will-writing should be regulated...
17 May 2013
The voluntary sector should create a “data manifesto” that identifies who holds data about the sector...
16 May 2013
While management in the charity sector has changed significantly in the past few decades, a reluctance...
13 May 2013
Your CivilSociety rounds-up the most read stories from the previous week.

Attending our one day courses is a highly effective way of ensuring new and existing trustees fully understand their role, responsibilities and liabilities.
Pete Bass
Freelance researcher
2 Mar 2012
I think everybody is missing the point of the register, and that the government have in fact got it right for once.
The proposal does exactly what it needs to do. If a government minister meets an internal lobbyist from a large company or a foreign diplomat, or indeed a charity we have access to that information through the freedom of information act, and hopefully if they ever get round to publishing it properly the lists of ministerial meetings with external organisations.
If they instead meet with an intermediary from Bell Pottinger or someone else who is paid to lobby on someone's behalf it makes a mockery of that transparency process unless we also know what interest they are representing when they meet the minister or official. That is why we need a register.
There is already a register of charities, which provides much greater transparency than for companies. Usually when a charity meets a government minister or high public official they shout it from the rooftops. I really don't think the voluntary sector needs to tie itself up in knots about this.
[Reply]