Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire (Cork South Central, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

Ba mhaith liom cuidiú leis an mBille seo. Tá sé tábhachtach agus tógann sé ar reachtaíocht a bhí réasúnta maith cheana féin ach air a bhfuil sé ag cur feabhas. Tá sé fíorthábhachtach go mbeadh trédhearcacht agus rialacháin réasúnta ann do charthanachtaí agus d'eagraíochtaí deonacha agus poiblí. In éineacht leis sin, caithfear meá a dhéanamh go mbeadh an trédhearcacht agus na rialacháin maith go leor agus go mbeadh, mar atá ráite ag an Teachta Donnelly ansin, ámh, an balance i gceart chun déanamh cinnte de go bhfuil go leor daoine gníomhach sna heagraíochtaí, go dtugann siad a gcuid ama dóibh agus gur féidir leo tacaíocht a thabhairt dóibh.

This is legislation we welcome. It builds on the foundation of the previous legislation and strengthens and improves it. The charity sector occupies a vitally important role in society, and there is no doubt that a balance needs to be struck. The Bill seeks to strike that balance, and I think, by and large, achieves it, between ensuring there is transparency and regulation but that the legislation and regulatory burden does not make it too difficult for people to get involved.

We are very lucky that, in Ireland, the voluntary sector is still quite substantially voluntary. This is not true in other jurisdictions. I know in an awful lot of other jurisdictions they do not have the same percentage of people from the general community giving of their time and assisting with voluntary and charitable organisations. We have a lot of work to do to try to preserve that for coming generations and to ensure the balance is struck well enough. There is, of course, a need for regulation and for transparency, so we agree we need to strengthen the sector and ensure greater transparency, clarity and fairness to enhance public confidence in the sector. It is unfortunate there have been instances of individuals and groups of individuals who have taken advantage of people's trust. Unfortunately, a few very disappointing and frustrating examples have made work for charities across the board an awful lot more difficult, and they have undermined confidence, especially with people who gave very generously to a cause they very much believed in and then found that the money they donated did not go to the place it should have gone to and did not do the good it should have done. That really frustrated and disillusioned people in some instances. I will not go into the examples and I am sure the Minister of State can think of some of them himself. In some instances, people had given very substantially over many years to some of these causes. It is right that there is proper regulation. What we need to do is to try to ensure the regulation is adequate, particularly for those larger charities that handle large amounts of money, but that we get the balance right. There obviously needs to be regulation for each and every size of charity. I am very conscious of it myself. Like Paul, I and I am sure many of us are involved in organisations. I am a board member of a local community organisation which is a company limited by guarantee and which works with all of the charity regulations and all the rest of it. There is a fair bit of work in it. In the example I am talking about, like I am sure Paul's and many other examples, these are just ordinary people from the local community who are doing the best they can with community development. There is a bit of work in it; there is no doubt about that.

I will raise again the point I raised previously during oral questions. There are good funding streams at the moment for the community and voluntary sector and that should be recognised. Charities and community organisations can incur significant costs when they are trying to improve their governance, whether that is advice on constitutions, legal advice or different bits and pieces like that. There is no fund for them to go to and community organisations have to dip into the coffers, the revenue they would have generated for their ordinary expenditure on the purpose for which they were set up. It is worth considering having some sort of fund that community organisations can apply for in order that they can improve the quality of their governance and policies and to ensure they are in full compliance. There is more support that can be offered. Charities are often very stretched for personnel and resources and we need to ensure they are supported and are not overburdened. We need to keep working on that.

We rely on charities and voluntary organisations an awful lot in this jurisdiction. An awful lot of public services are discharged through what are, in the usual context, section 39 or section 56 organisations but which, in very many instances, are charities and are governed by the Charities Regulator. We rely on them for services in health, education and in a great deal of other areas. They are probably the largest two areas, along with disabilities. When I speak about health, that is obviously a very significant part of their work. These are often charities and it is worth making the point, because this has been a dispute and debate that has gone on for some time for some of these organisations, that if charities are doing this vital, essential work that is so important to our communities and to the people who avail of their services and the good they do, they deserve their pay and conditions and they deserve to be adequately funded to provide these essential public services.

As Deputy Donnelly outlined, we support the inclusion of the advancement of human rights section. Many groups have long fought for the advancement of human rights to be considered as a valid charitable purpose. That is to be welcomed. I agree with Deputy Donnelly the lack of clarity that exists and the narrower interpretation that has been taken could potentially cause difficulty. In general debate and in general terms, I like to apply a very broad understanding of what politics is. As far as I am concerned, in usual discussion, politics is anything you do for the betterment of the community.

Obviously, that is not what we are discussing here. A narrow definition of what is political is required in the context of this legislation. We are aiming to ensure that political parties and factional partisan organisations, which are legitimate but are driven by elections or specific political purposes, are not treated as charities and that organisations that are focused on the advancement of human rights are protected. There are organisations across the road in Buswell's Hotel every week of the year that are charitable organisations, and they want the opportunity to be able to present to us. Most of what they do is fundraising and providing services, but they can see elements of policy that need to be addressed. That should not raise any questions about their charitable status. The Minister of State agrees on that point, so we need to ensure that the legislation protects them and does not prevent such activity in any way.

We need to use the 2018 wording. The Irish Council for Civil Liberties has raised this matter and it was reflected in the committee. The ICCL has recommended:

the advancement of human rights to have a meaningful impact in [real terms], it will be necessary for the regulator to revert to the original 2018 wording on political advocacy [or to clarify its advice] ... This would mean organisations established to exclusively promote a political cause should not, and cannot, be considered charities, as is correct. However, organisations should be allowed to conduct legitimate political advocacy ... work in pursuit of their charitable aims [and retain and obtain charitable status].

There has been a fair bit of discussion about what constitutes a significant event. The onus is on the charitable organisation to report the above. It is not clear what is substantial damage, reduction or loss. Is it more than 50% or would less than 50% be considered significant? A great deal of time could be spent trying to figure out what is or is not a significant event, so there is scope to tighten up the definition.

We are very fortunate to have such a strong charitable and not-for-profit sector in our society. It ranges from the large national organisations that are household names to the local or specific charities that do a detailed or localised type of work. We need to strike a balance. That is the Minister of State's objective as well, but there are one or two areas where we can do a bit more tweaking to get matters right. I urge the Minister of State to continue considering funding and support outside of a legislative context so that we can ensure that the people involved in charities are retained and new people are attracted. Tá sé fíorthábhachtach go leanann ár n-eagraíochtaí deonacha agus charthanachtaí ar aghaidh go láidir agus go mbeidh ar a gcumas daoine a thógáil isteach agus go dtabharfaidh an reachtaíocht nua seo cúnamh do na haidhmeanna atá ag na heagraíochtaí seo.

See this speech in context