The Charity Commission chair's unsupportive approach to the sector poses a very real threat to public trust and confidence, says Tania Mason.

Yesterday’s Civil Society eNews cannot have been comfortable reading for William Shawcross.

Three of our four stories were the result of people challenging the Charity Commission chair over comments he had made previously, none of which had gone down well with the sector he is charged with regulating.

It started back in the summer when he appeared to take the side of a Daily Telegraph journalist who had decided to have a pop at charity CEOs’ salaries. While Shawcross did say that setting executive pay was a matter for trustees, he fanned the flames of the story by adding that charities that pay “disproportionate” salaries risked bringing the sector into disrepute. Now various sources have told us that BBC Panorama has picked up the baton and is planning to air an investigation into charity executive pay next month. You could hear the collective sigh all over the sector as people read our story on that yesterday.

More recently, Shawcross has turned his attention to terrorism, and been using his public speeches to announce that the Commission will be stepping up its work to ensure that charities don’t allow themselves to be infiltrated or abused by extremists.  At every opportunity he singled out student groups, warning that universities must be especially vigilant not to give speaking platforms to terrorists.

Eventually the National Union of Students wrote to Shawcross to point out, politely but firmly, that it had already been working with the Charity Commission for some years to devise policies and guidance to ensure students’ unions are alert to the terror threat and can combat it. NUS already takes a “robust position” in regard to extremist speakers at UK universities, NUS president Toni Pearce told Shawcross.

Charities Aid Foundation chief John Low also felt the need to speak out. While not specifically naming Shawcross in his article for the Huffington Post, Low did mention that the Commission had recently issued an alert reminding charities of their responsibilities to prevent abuse by terrorists. In what could only be interpreted as a veiled swipe at Shawcross’ obsession with the issue, he went on to say that charities already expend “enormous effort” making sure their donations don’t find their way into the wrong hands.

Finally, there was Shawcross’ bizarre statement about the lobbying bill. Asked by charity lawyer Rosamund McCarthy last week at the CLA conference whether he shared the sector’s concerns about the bill, Shawcross told the assembled delegates that “most of the sector” was happy with it now that the government had proposed changes.  NCVO chief Sir Stuart Etherington – who happens to be McCarthy’s husband - was most bemused. He wrote to Shawcross on Tuesday asking him to provide evidence for his statement that most of the sector is happy. Apparently Shawcross will write back, but the Commission wouldn’t tell us what he will say.

All this, of course, came hot on the heels of the Cup Trust debacle and Shawcross’ woeful performance before the Public Accounts Committee, where he said that the Cup Trust would be a “substantial charity” if HMRC awards the claimed gift aid.

Mr Shawcross seems to be singlehandedly waging some kind of war on the sector, intent on spreading the message that charities are largely inhabited by overpaid executives with dodgy agendas.

Instead, he should be defending the sector and the charity 'brand' – insisting that CEO salaries are generally very reasonable given the complexity of the organisations they run; pointing out that international charities currently go to great lengths to protect themselves being corrupted by terrorists, and explaining that charities are already subject to strict rules on political campaigning with examples of breaches very rare indeed. Surely that's the best way to maintain public trust and confidence in charities?

But it’s clear that’s not the agenda his political masters want him to pursue. Gone are the days when the Charity Commission tried to be a champion of the sector as well as its regulator – nowadays ensuring compliance is the only game in town. Only time will tell what impact this has on public trust and confidence - but I bet it won't be good.