Sector bodies have expressed concerns after the prime minister promised to strengthen regulatory powers to close charities promoting extremism.
In a speech yesterday, Keir Starmer announced “much stronger powers for the Charity Commission to shut down charities that promote extremism” as part of plans to be “clearer as a society […] about what we expect of people”.
The proposals drew responses from sector organisations such as NCVO, whose chief executive Kate Lee warned that expanded closure powers would raise “real concerns” for charities.
However, others in the sector emphasised the importance of the commission having sufficient powers to do its job effectively.
In November, the government announced other plans to expand the commission’s powers, including an ability to ban people convicted of hate crimes from trusteeship.
The November announcement by culture minister Baroness Twycross came in a debate on a report by the National Secular Society, which recommended that regulators revoke the charitable status of organisations promoting misogyny.
Commenting on Starmer’s speech, a DCMS spokesperson said: “As part of efforts to tackle extremism, we are planning to strengthen the Charity Commission’s powers around the disqualification of individuals from being a trustee or senior manager of a charity.
“The changes will be made after a consultation which will launch in the near future.
“We will also look more widely at strengthening the Charity Commission’s powers, to ensure it has the powers it needs to tackle abuse of charitable status.”
A spokesperson for the commission said it used its current powers to “investigate concerns about links between a charity and any form of extremism or terrorism, taking enforcement action and making referrals to other agencies where appropriate”.
“We remain in active dialogue with the government to ensure our powers and our corresponding resources are fit for the present and the future,” they added.
Move risks ‘suppressing’ civil society voices
Lee said charities supporting minoritised communities would be particularly concerned about the plans to expand the commission’s powers.
“[These charities] may fear being put at risk if current or future political actors take issue with their mission,” she said.
“It’s vital that government engages with the sector now, in the spirit of the Civil Society Covenant, to ensure these necessary new safeguards cannot be misused to limit or silence civil society more broadly.”
Muslim Charities Forum chief executive Fadi Itani also expressed concern about the government’s plan.
“This proposal risks suppressing legitimate civil society voices and undermining organisations’ ability to speak out on critical issues,” he said.
“It represents yet another attempt to erode democratic principles within an already shrinking civic space.”
Itani added that protecting the independence of regulators was essential and urged it to remain free from political pressure or interference.
“[This is to] ensure fair, proportionate, and impartial oversight of the sector,” he said.
Commission needs ‘teeth’ to act decisively
Emeka Forbes, head of cohesion at Together Coalition, said: “Charitable status carries public trust and public responsibility. There can be no place for organisations that use it to promote violence, intimidation or extremist ideologies.
“It is therefore critical that the Charity Commission has the teeth it needs to act decisively where those lines are crossed.”
The partnership-network head added that “clear definitions” of extremism were essential, but called for “zero tolerance” on those who deliberately undermine social cohesion.
Jane Ide, ACEVO chief executive, also said the commission’s new powers must be clearly defined.
“It is right that the regulatory framework enables proportionate action against those few charities that act beyond their regulatory boundaries,” she said.
“At the same time, we must ensure that any expansion of the Charity Commission’s powers is exercised with clear safeguards and consistent processes so that legitimate civil society organisations are not inadvertently hindered in their work.”
She added that robust oversight needed to be accompanied by a fair and transparent regulatory environment that supports charities.
