Bobby Aylward (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fianna Fail)

I welcome the broad thrust and sentiments of the Charities Bill. It is generally recognised that the proposed legislation has many positive features that will have a significant bearing on the numerous people involved in valuable charitable work. The effect of the draft legislation is important to the general public, which contributes generously to many charitable causes year in, year out.

The specific intent of the Bill is to introduce a comprehensive reform of the law as it relates to charities to ensure proper accountability, protect against possible abuses of charitable status and eliminate the possibility of fraud. I endorse the principles contained in the Bill because its provisions will enhance public confidence in a vital area of activity. Appropriate transparency and regulation in that sector will ensure improved public trust and the establishment of a sound legal framework of regulation will facilitate the smooth, efficient administration and management of charitable organisations in general. It is widely accepted that any practical measures to enforce proper oversight and encourage active compliance can only be constructive.

This timely legislation will be supportive of the charities sector and will undoubtedly assist in promoting its aims. The Bill will foster increased public trust and support for the various charitable causes espoused in this country, which will be productive and beneficial to our society as a whole in the long term.

I welcome that the Bill seeks to eliminate bogus or illegal charity activity. For example, the Bill makes it a criminal offence to advertise or collect on behalf of a charitable organisation that is not duly registered. It is high time that any illicit activity that serves to discredit the activities of genuine charities should be outlawed and severe penalties imposed as a sanction for any breaches of the law. Indiscriminate cowboy activity that brings genuine charities into disrepute will be punishable and stamped out.

The Bill is a positive step towards regulating the activities of bona fide charities while addressing powerfully the problems and concerns associated with bogus operators. However, the legislation could be more robust and explicit when it comes to criminalising those persons and fly-by-night outfits purporting to collect either money or goods on behalf of vague charitable causes. The legislation should be more stringent in outlawing rogue activity and spurious charitable causes, particularly where the type of activity does not fall within the scope of section 41.

It would be useful to include another provision to make it a criminal offence to express or imply that moneys or goods collected or some portion thereof are destined for a charitable purpose where this statement proves to be false or misleading. Any individuals who promote or advertise such collections by way of notices or otherwise should be guilty of an offence under this legislation. Two examples include the collection of second-hand clothes purporting that the proceeds or part thereof go to charity when they are being sold for profit, generally in eastern Europe or Africa, and the sale of signed mass cards in shops that give the impression that the amount tendered goes to a priest in the Third World when much of the money is retained by the shop, with another large slice going to the commercial distributors of the cards. In neither example do the operators describe themselves as charities. Hence, the Bill as framed will not outlaw the rogue activity of misleading the public where there is no transparency or accountability. The Bill must take account of activity that only purports to give the impression of having charitable characteristics. This rogue activity not only misleads the public, but has a serious financial impact on charities that operate fully within the law. These charities must be protected by this legislation and rogue operators must be stopped once and for all.

The establishment of a new, independent regulatory authority is a notable departure. By vesting strong and comprehensive powers in the new body, it will operate with the clear objective of securing strict compliance with the various legal obligations to be imposed and it will encourage more streamlined administration and management of charities.

Community and voluntary organisations that undertake work for charitable purposes have been vocal advocates of adequate regulation and oversight and the Bill is a realistic response to their concerns. I hope the role of the new regulator will be supportive and that the authority will provide adequate information on the new regulatory regime and will act to facilitate the charitable bodies in their efforts to comply with that regime.

The Bill raises a number of issues that deserve closer scrutiny if the legislation is to be truly effective and embracing. The issue of advocacy by charities should be examined more closely. The Bill does not prohibit advocacy as an activity per se, but it does purport to exclude from the register of charities those organisations that promote political causes primarily. The consensus among organisations that may be affected is that this provision is unfair and unworkable. It represents the first of three tests that must be passed if an organisation is seeking to register as a charity. It is almost impossible to define the concept of a "political cause" or what exactly constitutes one. The lack of a clear definition will leave an undesirable grey area which will lead to greater confusion. The onus will be on the regulator to determine if an organisation's work is political. One of the primary purposes of this legislation should be to lend clarity and transparency to the charity sector.

A restrictive interpretation of the terms "charities" and "charitable purposes" will preclude certain bodies from registering. For example, the various organisations that work on human rights and equality issues or the bodies that endeavour to improve the effectiveness of the charity sector will find it difficult to qualify as charities according to the current definition. Several worthy bodies promote active citizenship or increase public awareness and mobilise public opinion in support of policies that favour the poor and the disadvantaged in our society. Many of these organisations may well lose their charitable status if the regulator determines that their altruistic or philanthropic activities are political. I am inclined to believe that the existing definition of excluded bodies should be removed and replaced with appropriate wording which expressly excludes only party political type organisations. I am aware that a number of charities and representative organisations have expressed reservations regarding the definition of charitable purposes and the implications it may have. The current definition is certainly not exhaustive and it is regarded as being overly restrictive and potentially exclusive of some legitimate charity organisations.

The wording "of benefit to the community" should be extended to ensure that particular causes are not disqualified only on the grounds that the benefit may not be immediately tangible or quantifiable. I share the misgivings that some bodies have expressed on this narrow definition. If the Bill is to achieve its stated aims, we must have regard to the dangerously limiting nature of this definition. For example, it has been noted that the three-pronged approach enshrined in the Bill has the capacity to exclude bodies engaged in the advancement of human rights, social inclusion and social justice. What about bodies that are engaged in the advancement of citizenship, the promotion of amateur sport or the advancement of the rights of children? Are they to be excluded simply because they do not satisfy the test as outlined in the Bill? Serious consideration should be given to embracing bodies that are engaged in humanitarian and similar activities. We must be enlightened, progressive, and far-sighted concerning the scope of this Bill. To deny access to a range of bodies that work tirelessly to advance ideals to enrich our society in the long term is backward and short sighted. The legislation will become meaningless if we are to exclude legitimate organisations that pursue legitimate goals for the overall betterment of our society.

I endorse the fundamental principles embodied in this Bill. However, it is necessary to review some of its more restrictive provisions and to lend it additional teeth in its efforts to combat bogus activities and scams, such as the examples I have outlined. In the interests of enacting legislation that is comprehensive and reflects the reality of the charitable sector, it is appropriate to reconsider any of those sections which are unduly limiting and which will deprive certain genuine and well motivated bodies from achieving charitable status thus denying them the attendant rights and responsibilities which that status entails.

See this speech in context