Share

Commission looking into 'sock puppet' think tank the Institute of Economic Affairs

Commission looking into 'sock puppet' think tank the Institute of Economic Affairs
News

Commission looking into 'sock puppet' think tank the Institute of Economic Affairs

Governance | David Ainsworth | 22 Mar 2016

The Charity Commission is looking into right-wing think tank the Institute of Economic Affairs, which produced ‘sock puppet’ research lobbying for government to restrict charity advocacy.

The Commission received a complaint from Andrew Purkis, a former Commission board member and chair of several charities.

Purkis wrote to Paula Sussex, chief executive of the Commission, saying that the IEA, a registered charity, did not appear to be carrying out any charitable activity.

The IEA has consistently lobbied government to prevent charities which receive public funding from lobbying government. It produced two reports saying that charities were being used as "sock puppets" by government to lobby itself.

The reports were cited by Matt Hancock, minister for the Cabinet Office, in his announcement that charities receiving government grants would no longer be allowed to use that money to advocate on behalf of beneficiaries.

Purkis said the IEA was in breach of Commission principles by refusing to reveal the funds it used for this political lobbying, and also said that promoting a particular economic viewpoint was not a charitable activity.

“We will consider the issues you have raised about the Institute's campaigning and political activities and whether it is acting in furtherance of its charitable purposes,” Sussex wrote back.

“I have therefore asked our Permissions and Compliance Team to take this forward and let you have a response after they have conducted their investigations.”

Purkis quoted Commission EU guidance which said: ‘If your charity does get involved in any political activity connected with the referendum, you should ensure that, during such involvement, you publicly acknowledge the source of your funding so that the reasons for your involvement can be fully assessed.’

“This principle applies pari passu to the contentious political activity of the IEA, trying to lobby government in favour of restricting use of government funds for charity advocacy and engaging in wider influencing work against "nanny state" policies relating to lifestyles and public health,” he wrote.

“Yet the IEA trustees’ report does not identify the sources of the donations on which the charity mainly relies, and this lack of transparency, especially in relation to the activities I have mentioned, has led to widespread allegations that vested interests such as tobacco companies or the food industry may be involved.

“I understand that Mr Christopher Snowdon, director of lifestyle economics has refused to disclose the source of the funding for his work. This infringes the guidance quoted above and detracts from the reputation of the charity as a contributor to public debate and policy-making.

“Secondly, my understanding is that promoting a particular view of economics is not in itself a charitable objective, and the IEA must carry out its charitable objective of contributing to learning and education.

“Again, my understanding is that learning and education is not understood by the Commission or the courts to be promoting a particular view or outcome. It must be aimed at a broader understanding, not acceptance of a particular prescription. Yet it seems that some of the political activities of the IEA involve influencing and lobbying ministers and politicians in favour of a very particular prescription such as introducing gagging clauses into grants to charities, or curtailing particular kinds of public health policies.

“If the promotion of free market economics were a charitable objective, it is clear that such activity could be a means of pursuing it, but it is not at all clear how this activity can be a means of pursuing the advancement of learning and education. So I request the Commission to investigate whether in respect of specific and contentious campaigning and lobbying activity the IEA has been acting properly within its charitable objects.”

 

Comments

[Cancel] | Reply to:

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.

'Could mega cities be even harder to work with than individual local councils?'

29 Sep 2016

Dan Corry, chief executive of NPC, asked Labour mayoral candidates how devolution would impact the charity...

Barnardo’s opens 89 charity shops and aims to be ‘biggest chain in the country’

29 Sep 2016

Barnardo’s opened 89 charity shops last year, and has overtaken Oxfam to become the second largest charity...

Report: What makes a good charity?

29 Sep 2016

A free guide on how to assess whether a charity is operating effectively has been published by think tank...

‘There’s no question Oxfam was culpable in fundraising scandals’, says Mark Goldring

30 Sep 2016

Oxfam was culpable in fundraising scandals of last summer because it failed to supervise its contractors,...

‘Charities do not have the technology to comply with the Fundraising Preference Service’

30 Sep 2016

Only a handful of large charities have the technological tools to comply with the Fundraising Preference...

Sport Relief 2016 raises record £72.5m

30 Sep 2016

Comic Relief has announced that its biennial fundraising event, Sport Relief, raised a record £72.5m,...

‘Charities do not have the technology to comply with the Fundraising Preference Service’

30 Sep 2016

Only a handful of large charities have the technological tools to comply with the Fundraising Preference...

Eduserv agrees £138,000 payment to retiring CEO without telling full board

26 Sep 2016

Eduserv, a charity that provides IT services to the public sector, agreed to pay its retiring chief executive...

Barnardo’s launches ten-year strategy with plans to double fundraising income

22 Sep 2016

Barnardo’s has announced a ten-year strategy which will aim to grow income by a third and change its...

Join the discussion

Twitter
 
Training

Attending our one day courses is a highly effective way of ensuring new and existing trustees fully understand their role, responsibilities and liabilities.

>> Find out more <<