Being seen as “political” makes a charity easy to ignore and can undermine what it is trying to achieve, delegates at the Labour Party Conference heard yesterday.

The comments were made by Zoe Williams, Guardian journalist and charity trustee, who was speaking at a fringe event run by Acevo called Speaking up for Civil Society: When Should Charities Provide Political Opposition?

The event looked at moves by government to reduce charities' ability to campaign. Williams told delegates that becoming seen as a political organisation is "the kiss of death for charities now", and this happens, the charity is "not heeded, is very easily reduced and ignored.”

She said this stance means the sector “becomes self-policing", because there is a "real threat that your charity status could be taken away".

Williams said it can undermine a charity’s work and what they are trying to do.

She spoke about the example of RSPCA, whose powers are due to be discussed in a parliamentary committee. She said that the committee will discuss whether the RSPCA should be a campaigning organisation or concerned with animal welfare.

But, she said: "How can you be concerned with animal welfare if you're not going to campaign against people killing animals. It is preposterous."

Williams said that the RSPCA is "so backed to the wall with this that it can't resist, and ends up giving very lukewarm answers" to these accusations.

She said it is behaving in a "surrendered" fashion.

Lobbying Act

Williams said that in the run up to the Lobbying Act, "being politically neutral has become an indicator of a respectable charitable organisation". But, this "in itself is quite ridiculous, because most problems are systemic - the idea that you could care about homelessness but then have no view on housing supply is absurd".

Hold government to account

Javed Khan, chief executive of Barnardos, said that charities need to stay true to their roots and speak up on the behalf of the people they represent.

He said: "We have a responsibility to hold government to account, but to do that in a sophisticated way".

Khan went on to say that "opposing party policy is legitimate and right".

He said: "I don't believe in shrill campaigning or any sort of clandestine plans that are designed to ambush ministers into submission. I don't think that it the way to do it.

"We need a mature debate that challenges political thinking based on solid evidence."