The public discussion over the future of Ched Evans, the footballer released on Friday after serving two and a half years in jail for a 2011 rape, has been understandably heated.
Latest Posts Subscribe to this blog
Extraordinary. I don’t use this word lightly, but the public response on JustGiving to the fire at the Manchester Dogs Home last night has been quite literally extraordinary. And not just under the allegedly controversial newfangled definition of the word “literally”, either.
The total raised for the charity running the home was £130,000 when I woke up, just nine hours after the JustGiving page was set up by the Manchester Evening News, and only 12 hours after the fire itself. By the time I got to my desk, it was £400,000. When I finished writing my story on this literal whirlwind of charitable support just a couple of hours ago, it was £560,000. This had risen by nearly another £100,000 by the time I had written my first draft of this piece.
A cartoon by Steve Bell a while ago showed a masked robber in the Big Society Bank being told that they didn’t have any money as such – only bollocks. “Put the bollocks in a bag, and hurry,” says the robber.
The original of this cartoon was presented as a farewell gift yesterday to Nick Hurd, who resigned as minister for civil society in July, by the National Council for Voluntary Organisations. Hurd was, of course, the apostle of social investment and one of his proudest achievements was the launch of the bank – actually called Big Society Capital – in 2012.
Earlier this week, I joined the likes of Cristiano Ronaldo, Victoria Beckham and George W Bush and participated in the ice bucket challenge.
I can’t say I was surprised when a clip of a friend doing the deed and nominating me to go next popped up on my Facebook account; having seen my feed gradually fill up with these videos over the previous couple of days, I knew it was only a matter of time.
Ask tricky questions, went the instructions at an event hosted by St John Ambulance on Wednesday, where I had my first opportunity to met Brooks Newmark, the new Minister for Civil Society. “But please be polite when you do.”
That instruction wasn’t for me, but the dozen young people present – St John Ambulance volunteers and Volunteer Police Cadets – two of the 14 youth groups benefitting from a new £10m pot of Libor fines, which Newmark was there to publicise.
The latest independent evaluation of the government-backed National Citizen Service, which is delivered by a range of organisations including many charities, is a seminar in positivity.
The findings from researchers at Ipsos Mori reveal a highly popular youth scheme – no less than 97 per cent of participants who took part in 2013 would recommend the programme. It also shows the programme helped young people to improve a range of skills.
It’s been a tough old week for fundraising. First, Channel 4’s Dispatches programme sends a couple of undercover reporters to dish dirt on the internal goings-on at two of the country’s best-known fundraising agencies. Then a disgruntled volunteer fundraiser launches a tirade about “chugging”, as he persistently calls it, claiming that paid street fundraisers are having a negative impact on those who collect money for charity for free.
The Green Cross code – that’s ‘Stop, Look, Listen, Think’ for the daredevil types among you – has served me pretty well in life. I wonder if the same maxim could stand charity trustees considering a charity tribunal appeal in good stead.
The First-tier Tribunal (Charity) in England and Wales, and its Northern Irish and Scottish counterparts, were created to be a low-cost, accessible, non-legalistic paths to charity justice. Unfortunately, in some cases it seems the option of lodging a tribunal appeal is unjustifiably attractive to charity trustees, whose decision then comes back to bite them.
Apparently there’s some sort of teacake and dog festival starting in Scotland this week – but the big north of the border event as far as I’m concerned has been the publication of the Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator’s annual report.
The most significant announcement in the report is the news that the OSCR will start publishing charities’ accounts on its website at some point soon, pending a slightly knotty legal issue parliament will need to sort out through legislation.
While the website of the Charity Commission already freely and easily gives access to the last five years of accounts for English and Welsh charities, the same doesn’t happen in Scotland.
Online publication of accounts would contribute to the regulator’s goal of “charities you can trust and that provide public benefit”, the OSCR’s report says. Separately, David Robb, the chief executive of the OSCR, told me that the new policy “is supported by our recent stakeholder surveys, which showed that public confidence is encouraged by transparency”.
My question is: how? This doesn’t actually provide evidence or tell us the way in which publishing accounts will increase trust. The fear, of course, is that having more information out there in the public domain makes you vulnerable to bad headlines, or members of the public mistrusting what they don’t understand. A member of the public who comes across something they don’t understand on p27 of your annual accounts is surely more likely to decide it must be something fishy than they are to email your FD for an explanation. Transparency, while it is so often seen as an inherently good thing in and of itself, is not a synonym of trustworthiness.
Another clue as to why the OSCR has come out with this policy is that, as it notes in its report, the Charity Commission already does it. All very well, but I wonder how far the fact of what is done in London will go in explaining broader policy decisions of the OSCR, or the Charity Commission for Northern Ireland, or two recently announced regulators – the Charity Commissioner for Jersey, or the Charities Regulatory Authority in the Republic of Ireland. With the amount of flack the commission gets, is it the best role model?
These concerns aside, it is still worth celebrating the fact that the Charity Commission, and therefore the third sector, is ahead of the game here. Trying to get the annual reports of a private company from Companies House is a mini-minefield, with a very user-unfriendly website and online system to navigate and a fee of £1 for each document you want to read. That said, Companies House did announce last week that it was going to overhaul its system and get rid of that charge – so we won’t be in the ascendancy for long.
What, then, is the commission’s next move? Ten years of accounts to be made publicly available? Every annual account ever? With infinite space for documents on the cybersphere, there is a never-ending scope for more information to be put out to the masses.