Proposals for charities to be on a new lobbying register could have a “chilling effect” on their campaigning activity, sector organisations have warned.
The Ethics & Integrity Committee (EIC) has proposed introducing requirements for all charities and other organisations that lobby the government to be put on a public register, potentially having to pay a registration fee.
It suggested an AI-enabled register, with a sliding scale for the registration fee and either no or a nominal cost for smaller businesses and charities.
However, umbrella body NCVO and others in the sector have warned about the potential for discouraging charity campaigning.
Leigh Brimicombe, NCVO’s chief of influencing, said: “It is vital that civil society organisations of all sizes have the confidence to campaign for and speak up for the communities they serve.
“For many, campaigning is the best or only way to achieve their mission. This is recognised in the Civil Society Covenant, so it’s important charities are supported, not restricted, to engage with government and decision makers in the pursuit of better outcomes for people and communities.
“Measures that create uncertainty, fear or additional financial and administrative burdens risk having a chilling effect, particularly on smaller charities.
“We support appropriate transparency around lobbying, but any new requirements must be proportionate, practical and not inadvertently discourage charities from speaking up.”
Meanwhile, movement strategist and researcher, Natasha Adams, who previously co-authored a report detailing how “cultures of timidity” are stopping charities from responding to threats from the far-right, said: “In principle I'm all for transparency but I would be wary about the impacts of asking already stretched charities to pay a registration fee.
Admin burden concerns
The EIC’s report on the proposals, entitled Lobbying, Business Appointment Rules and Disclosure, follows a formal request from the government to launch a review into these areas in March 2026.
More than 40 stakeholders and interested groups, including NCVO, gave their opinions on the proposals as part of the review.
In its submission, NCVO shared its concern that the introduction of an additional reporting process could deter smaller organisations from engaging, especially if they are risk-averse and concerned about falling foul of the rules.
It added: “Smaller organisations often don’t have any paid staff, and are less likely to have staff or teams dedicated to advocacy or lobbying activity.
“Trustees of charities are voluntary. It is therefore important to reduce unnecessary regulatory burden on these organisations.”
It also noted that while some charities undertook significant amounts of campaigning as part of their work, and had advocacy teams dedicated solely to this purpose, other charities did not engage in any campaigning work.
It cited research from the Sheila McKechnie Foundation which indicated a “chilling effect” following the introduction of the Lobbying Act, in part due to “administrative burden and ambiguity in the legislation”.
Speaking on the proposals, Katie Roberts, chief executive Sheila McKechnie Foundation, told Civil Society: “The evidence is clear: when charities and community organisations feel unable to speak out, it is often the voices of the most marginalised people that are lost from public debate.
“Civil society plays a vital role in helping people participate in democracy and hold decision-makers to account. Any regulatory framework should protect transparency while ensuring charities can campaign confidently on behalf of the communities they represent.”
Need for requirements to easy to understand and proportionate
NCVO urged the EIC to ensure requirements would be “easy to understand, free, and proportionate” if the reporting requirements were to be expanded to include charities, citing concerns about such requirements adding to charities already-increasing operating costs.
When concluding its submission, NCVO wrote that while it was broadly supportive of greater transparency of how government operates and more transparency of charities under charity law and regulation, it questioned “whether charities need to be subject to further scrutiny through expanded reporting”.
It added: “We recommend that government representatives take responsibility for recording engagement rather than additionally requiring civil society organisations to record the same engagement activity.”
Related articles
