Jillian van Turnhout (Independent) | Oireachtas source

We are having a very good debate on this and we could say we are all in agreement and that the word on this is "consensus". However, knowing Senator O'Brien as I do, I feel she would like the word to be "urgency" and to feel we are bringing an entrepreneurial spirit to this motion. It is good that we have consensus, but is that good enough? It is not, and that is the reason Senator O'Brien has used precious Private Members' time to raise this issue. There was consensus among our group that this was such an important issue that we should try to nudge and drive the process further along. I acknowledge the work Senator Mary Ann O'Brien has done to champion the issue of the implementation of the Charities Act.

As a volunteer with the Girl Guides and having been chief executive of the Children's Rights Alliance, I speak from personal experience of the charities sector. I was working with the alliance coming up to the Charities Act and during the debate on the Bill on what needed to be done. We had to consider whether our organisation would be prepared and ready for that Act. Our organisation and many others prepared themselves and worked to ensure they reached the highest standards. We double-checked everything we did and examined our financial reporting and so on. However, the issue is that we still do not quite know what the implementation of the Charities Act will mean for financial reporting. Therefore, we look to the UK to see its models of good practice and the accounting standards used there. When it comes to compliance, charities here are working in a vacuum with regard to the standard that will apply here. How can they say they are reaching the best standard when there are potentially different ways in which the Act will be implemented? However, we want to ensure we are fully compliant.

With regard to donations received, we do not know how these are to be declared. The public want to know this, but the organisations want to know also, so they can ensure they have the required systems in place. Every organisation produces an annual report and in our role as Senators we receive quite a number of annual reports. However, often, when I look at the annual reports of well-known charities, I notice they do not necessarily report against the objectives of their organisation. We get reports of activities and of what they are doing, but the Charities Act talks about the objectives of the organisation. Therefore, reports should be written against those objectives.

We have all cited good examples of charities, but we must be careful that we do not confuse charities with the not-for-profit sector. Sometimes, the same organisation can be both a charity and a not-for-profit organisation. However, some organisations have chosen to work as limited companies in the not-for-profit sector. What we are talking about today is the "charity" brand and what that means. We know some charities will adopt the regulations early, and nobody has a difficulty with that. However, in the next wave of organisations to be looked at by the regulator, how will the public know which organisations are fulfilling the Charities Act and which are not?

Senator Ó Murchú spoke about people collecting outside shops or banks. I have sometimes looked at the names of the organisations collecting in that manner and have never heard of them previously. I wonder then how I can know if the collector is collecting money legitimately or whether the money collected will go to the charity. I would like to know that 100% of the money collected in such bucket collections goes to the charity. I want to know when I give my money that it will all go to the charity, not that just 10% will go to it. There is an issue with regard to public trust and confidence in the brand or charity.

That is about fundraising, but it is also about getting volunteers involved with an organisation. We need to look at the resources a charity has to hand. Those who will be supporters in many ways would support and help organisations, but they need to know that it is correct.

We have given examples of where organisations apply good practice and the difficulty is how one compares them. Unless we have a standard formula for how organisations report and show their financial information, both expenditure and income, how will we be able to compare organisations and the level of funding? This is a bigger question for the State. It astounds me that Departments, when allocating funding, have no idea what other Departments give funding to an organisation. Other than going to the Companies Office and requesting the organisation's accounts, it is often difficult for them to know. Even if one wants to look at the good use of public money, that would be an issue.

I fully support the motion from our group which is being led by Senator Mary Ann O'Brien. As I said, she is an entrepreneur and knows all about branding. For me, this is one of the reasons we need to ensure the charity name stands for something. We have heard too many stories, even in recent weeks, where that brand has been damaged. We need to ensure there is clarity about the implications of the Charities Act and when it is being implemented. We all want to see an operational charities regulator. As I said, I would prefer it if the word "urgency" was included, with "consensus", in the motion.