William Shawcross, chair of the Charity Commission, has warned of "the damage charities can do to themselves" if they push too hard on campaigning.
Shawcross also said he regrets the regulator’s initial guidance on campaigning during the European Referendum, because it deterred charity involvement.
He was speaking last week at Wild Search, an advisory company, about the guidance produced for charities on campaigning, which was rewritten after sector bodies expressed concern over its tone and questioned whether it misrepresented the law.
Shawcross said: “Some felt our guidance was too restrictive and threatened to deter charities from becoming involved. I regret this. Our aim was not to stifle legitimate contributions, rather to advise charities how they may contribute within the limits set by law.
“In response to some concerns, we adjusted this guidance to offer further clarity, and indeed is clearly states ‘there may be some circumstances in which it is appropriate for a charity to set out the pros and cons of a yes or no vote’.
“Campaigning treads a fine line, of course. We have seen the damage charities can do to themselves if they push too hard.”
Shawcross was not the first of the Commission board to express regret.
Orlando Fraser, chair of the policy guidance committee, which approves Commission guidance, apologised for the guidance in an exclusive interview with Civil Society News.
Require grant money to go on governance
Shawcross also proposed that charities should be required to spend a portion of every grant on governance and leadership, to make up for the fact that the Commission does not have as much money to spend in these areas.
Shawcross said that recent scandals in charities “threaten to undermine this work and good governance is the key to the long-term health of charity”. He said that it “is crucial that charities invest in governance, with time as much as money”.
"Successive revelations and high-profile collapses have hit public trust in charities," he said. "The level of outrage at fundraising practices and the high-profile collapse of Kids Company, was so great due to the gulf between expectation and reality. Bernard Shaw defined indecency as ‘matter out of place’, and I think this helps explain at least part of the public disquiet. The public realised instinctively that the practices employed by some charities did not fit with the values of charity nor of philanthropy.
"Now there is much work to do, particularly on governance.
"I hope that foundations, umbrella bodies and others interested in the future of charity to champion the investment of time and resource in developing the quality of boards and the role of trustees. When making grants, for example, should there be a requirement that some of the new money is spent on governance and developing leadership?"
See the full speech here.
