Joe O'Brien (Dublin Fingal, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

I am delighted to have the opportunity to bring the Charities (Amendment) Bill 2023 before the House. The passing of this Bill is an essential step to enhance and strengthen the existing framework for regulating charities in Ireland. The charity sector plays a crucial role in connecting the wider public with opportunities to support and improve communities and society at large. It also plays an integral role in the provision of services to our communities. According to available statistics, in 2022, just under 648,000 people volunteered with an Irish charity. The economic value of this voluntary participation is highly significant. It is estimated that these volunteers contributed in excess of €1 billion worth of their time to Irish charities and, in turn, to our communities. Indeed, figures show the number of those volunteering with Irish charities has more than doubled since 2018, and almost one in eight workers are employed within the charity sector. Our charity sector consists of over 11,500 organisations of different legal types and of varying sizes, large and small.

The approach taken in this Bill reflects this diversity in the scale and complexity of the organisations that make up the charities sector in Ireland. The amendments contained will further strengthen our valued charities sector, ensuring greater transparency, clarity and fairness, which will serve to enhance public confidence and trust in the sector itself.

This trust is vital to the work of our charities whose activities are integral to making Ireland an inclusive and thriving place to live, in bringing a sense of dignity and belonging to people's lives, and in putting the wellbeing of individuals and of communities at the heart of our society.

To ensure that our charities continue to thrive, we urgently require an updated legal framework that reflects the reality of operations on the ground. In this context, the Bill delivers on a programme for Government commitment to ensure that the Charities Regulator has the necessary powers to build trust and confidence in the management and administration of charities. With such a large number charities on the Public Register of Charities, the work of the Charities Regulator is vitally important. The regulator has made significant progress in recent years in enhancing compliance and enforcement measures. These measures include the introduction of the charities governance code and related supports and conducting statutory investigations into charities, as well as the publication of guidance on topics such as safeguarding and fundraising. The positive level of engagement by the sector with this code demonstrates the will and commitment that exists to enhance standards and practices.

The Bill will consolidate the existing legal framework for the Charities Regulator to conduct its statutory functions and further foster a culture of proportionate regulation. In particular, the extensive operational experience of the regulator has resulted in a number of the proposed amendments.

Pre-legislative scrutiny has also provided a great opportunity to discuss and examine the potential impacts of the proposed Bill. I have listened closely to the concerns raised during pre-legislative scrutiny. The recommendations of the committee have been carefully considered in the drafting process, taking into account those areas requiring greater clarification and further consideration. This has resulted in a number of changes to the original amendments proposed, as well as the introduction of new amendments to the Bill. For example, a new definition of “significant event” has now been included and the statutory requirement to report significant events, as contained in the published general scheme, has been removed. Instead, a revised provision has been included to allow the Charities Regulator to draft non-statutory guidelines or codes of conduct in respect of the occurrence of a significant event. The Bill also contains provisions that ensure charities that are also companies are held to the same set of rules as charities that are associations.

Fair and reflective regulation is the basis of this Bill. In this context, it is important to emphasize that the regulator already adopts a proportionate approach to regulation. The regulator engages directly with individual charities to support and enhance their understanding of both statutory reporting requirements and governance standards and works with the charities to bring them into compliance. The small number of cases in which the regulator has had to appoint an inspector reflects the constructive and proactive engagement undertaken.

There is an inherent risk that public confidence in the sector and its regulator will be eroded if the Charities Regulator is unable to effectively deal with concerns brought to its attention simply because the required powers are not provided for in statute. In this regard, and among the provisions contained, is an amendment to strengthen the powers of the regulator to intervene in instances where it is determined that no effective management or board oversight exists. The Bill also aims to avoid situations where charities and their volunteers, who give up their valuable time to do good for our communities, are unnecessarily overburdened with administration. In many cases, the Bill will ease the administrative burden on smaller charities. For example, this legislation will allow for the introduction of regulations which will increase financial reporting thresholds, which means a greater number of our smaller charities would be entitled to avail of an exemption to prepare and submit an annual statement of accounts.

In the context of administrative burden, the Bill provides for a number of exemptions and specific reporting requirements for those charities falling under the proposed, revised definition of an "education body". These amendments recognise that in respect of the identified provisions, education bodies are already subject to equivalent, statutory oversight from Government Departments and agencies respectively. The purpose of these amendments is to avoid duplication between the regulatory functions of the Charities Regulator and these same Departments or agencies respectively, and to avoid placing unnecessary additional administrative burdens on these types of charities and their trustees.

Charity trustees play a key role in developing public trust and confidence in the charity sector. Measures included in this Bill will provide clarity on the roles and responsibilities of trustees. It is important to emphasise that these are not new or additional duties. They are a statement of the duties to which charity trustees are already subject under common law and will not result in any additional burden. The codification of duties should help to guide charity trustees by providing greater clarity as to the nature of the duties that apply to all charity trustees, and by providing a point of reference for charity trustees to inform their discussions with each other and with their charity's employees and other volunteers. With this Bill, we are seeking to create an environment where trustees have a clarity of purpose in carrying out their duties and where people are willing and confident to volunteer to become trustees in the first instance.

The Bill will introduce the advancement of human rights as a recognised charitable purpose under Irish law, mirroring its key position within our national and international policy. Human rights is a concept already recognised and defined on a statutory footing in Ireland. However, Ireland is unusual among common law jurisdictions in not having the advancement of human rights defined as a charitable purpose. In addition, the Bill will also facilitate amendments in other areas, including sharing of information, intermediate sanctions, trustee remuneration and disposal of assets, amendments that will ultimately further enhance public trust and confidence in the charities sector.

Having set out the background, context and purpose of the Bill, I now want to set out its main provisions. The Bill is divided into three parts, with 40 sections in total. I wish to highlight that sections 17 to 19, inclusive, and 40 are developed from a number of amendments that were previously approved by Government and included in the Courts and Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2017. Additionally, the extensive operational experience of the regulator has resulted in a number of the amendments contained in this Bill.

Part 1 covers sections 1 and 2 and addresses preliminary and general matters. It contains standard provisions relating to the Title, commencement and definition of the Principal Act. Part 2 Bill includes sections 3 to 38, inclusive, and provides for a number of amendments to the Charities Act 2009. Part 3 contains sections 39 and 40 and provides for amendments to the Charities Act 1961 and the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997, respectively.

Section 3 includes updates to existing definitions, as well as the introduction of new definitions for the purpose of clarity under the Act. This includes an update to the definition of “charity trustee” to provide greater clarity on those persons to whom the term applies.

Section 4 clarifies the charitable purposes under existing law and establishes “the advancement of human rights” as a recognised charitable purpose under Irish law for the first time.

The provisions in sections 5 and 6 are intended to strengthen the broader regulatory landscape, including enabling the Charities Regulator to enter into administrative co-operation arrangements with other relevant bodies.

Section 7 includes a number of provisions that underpin a fair and equitable registration process for organisations seeking charitable status, as well as assisting the Charities Regulator in maintaining accurate and comprehensive information on the register of charities. This is of critical importance to public trust and confidence in the sector.

Section 9 will require that charities seek approval from the Charities Regulator in circumstances where they want to change their charitable purpose or change a specified clause. This amendment has been revised further to consideration of concerns raised at the Oireachtas joint committee.

Continued adherence to the principles of natural justice and due process was a key consideration in the drafting of provisions. In this context, amendments contained in sections 10 to 14, inclusive, set out in further detail the process involved where a removal of an organisation from the register of charities is proposed. In reference to concerns raised during pre-legislative scrutiny in respect of due process and fair procedure, I want to reassure the House that a decision by the regulator to remove a charity from the register is subject to an appeal to the Charity Appeals Tribunal and confirmation by the High Court. The Bill also expands the grounds under which appeals to the Charity Appeals Tribunal can be taken. The tribunal itself adjudicates on appeals against certain decisions of the Charities Regulator and is independent in the performance of its statutory functions. In addition to the removal process referred to, the Bill provides for the right to appeal the following: a condition to which a registration is subject; a decision in relation to the amendment of the charity's constitution; or a direction arising from an inspector's report. The Bill also provides for an increase in membership of the tribunal.

Among the provisions contained in section 15 is a requirement relating to the publication of a charitable organisation's registration number as it appears on the register of charities. This number is an extremely important identifier for the public and it is critical that all registered charities use this number in published materials.

As outlined, the Bill is a key step in facilitating the introduction of much-needed financial regulations for the charity sector. Currently, almost 41% of registered charities are companies and are not required to prepare an annual statement of accounts to the regulator due to an anomaly caused by the introduction of the Companies Act 2014. The Bill provides for the removal of an existing financial reporting exemption for registered charities that are companies which occurred following the introduction of the Companies Act 2014.

Section 16 clarifies the requirement for charities that are companies to keep proper books of account.

Section 17 will, among other things, increase the existing threshold to prepare an annual statement of accounts from €100,000 to €250,000, exempting approximately 4,300 charities from this requirement. As part of regulations to be introduced under this section, there will also be a requirement that a charity with a gross income or total expenditure exceeding €250,000 prepare an annual statement of accounts in accordance with the methods and the principles of the charity statement of recommended practice, SORP.

Section 18 clarifies that an annual audit or examination of accounts, as provided for under section 50 of the Principal Act, will apply to both incorporated and unincorporated charities whose gross income or total expenditure exceeds €250,000.

As highlighted, the Bill contains amendments related to codifying charity trustee duties and requirements.

Section 22 contains a statement of the duties of trustees. It is important to clarify that these are not new or additional duties. Charity trustees are already subject to these duties under common law. Including them in statute will further enhance and empower both existing trustees and potential trustees by giving greater clarity in respect of roles and responsibilities. These duties include to act in good faith, honestly and responsibly in the best interests of the charity, avoiding conflicts of interest, and exercising due care and diligence. Section 22 also introduces a new requirement for a minimum number of three trustees to sit on the board of a charity, clarifies residency requirements to include those trustees resident in the United Kingdom, and introduces the new definition of “connected relative”. This definition will help avoid any unintended and potentially unworkable limitations in the operation of the Bill in respect of persons eligible to sit as charity trustees.

Section 30 contains amendments which propose to expand the range of circumstances in which the Charities Regulator can impose intermediate sanctions for certain breaches under the Act. In circumstances where such sanctions are warranted, they can provide a more effective and balanced regulatory remedy as an alternative to prosecution. It is important to highlight that under the existing process, the Charities Regulator engages with the charity in question voluntarily in the first instance to bring it into compliance. Where the charity's response does not sufficiently address the concern raised, the Charities Regulator may seek further information by way of a statutory direction. If having issued such a direction, the Charities Regulator is not sufficiently assured by its engagement with the charity and significant concerns remain, it may propose the imposition of intermediate sanctions, with the agreement of the charity.

Section 31 contains an amendment which clarifies and strengthens the regulator's powers to intervene where there is no effective management or board oversight in a charity. It also provides for necessary protection for anyone appointed by the court to serve as a charity trustee, providing indemnity in respect of matters which occurred before his or her appointment, and for his or her own acts or omissions provided they have not been made in bad faith, are not negligent or do not constitute misconduct.

Section 34 clarifies when an agreement or appointment for goods or services can be entered into by a charity with a relevant person, and only then when permission is sought and granted by the Charities Regulator. These provisions are a result of engagement with counterparts across government and consideration of cross-sectoral impacts. It also facilitates an appeal mechanism to the District Court against a decision of the authority in respect of permission being refused.

The provisions contained in section 39, dealing with the Charities Act 1961, will provide legal clarity in respect of court-ordered schemes, assist in respect of dispositions of charity lands on terms that are advantageous to the charity, and remove the requirement for prior written notice on potential litigants intending to commence proceedings in relation to a charity.

Our charity sector is an important and valued part of Irish society. I look forward to working with Oireachtas colleagues in the coming months to pass this legislation that seeks to further enhance and consolidate the existing legal framework for the Charities Regulator to conduct its statutory functions and which reflects the reality of charity operations on the ground. I commend the Bill to the House.

Paul Donnelly (Dublin West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister for bringing forward the Bill. Sinn Féin supports its overall purpose and I will address some of the issues that have been brought forward during the pre-legislative process and identified by others. I found the pre-legislative process and the committee meetings very useful. I thank everyone who engaged with them, including the Charities Regulator, the ICCL and the members.

First, we need to remind ourselves why we are doing this and to look at the massively important work being done by charities throughout the island of Ireland. These include those working in healthcare, drug services, homelessness, housing services, rehabilitation, recovery, and providing food and other basic needs to anyone and everyone in our communities. Many of these community and voluntary organisations grew out of a failure of the State to provide for the basic needs of our citizens. I would like to give an example of one of those that is close to my heart, Aoibheann's Pink Tie. Aoibheann was a beautiful young girl who was diagnosed with cancer. Her father, Jimmy Norman, who is a friend of mine, along with his family, spent night and day in St. John’s oncology ward in Crumlin. It was during the dark days of the economic crisis and money was tight for all the families in St. John’s ward. One of the nastiest cuts that happened during that period was to a discretionary fund that had been distributed by social workers in the hospital. Not having that left people without even money to pay for parking spaces or food. Jimmy saw the need and I was there for the very first night of the charity when we organised a fundraiser. It has grown into a fantastic charity which looks after the needs of families and children in St. John’s ward and children with cancer. It is opening a second new home for families to be able to stay overnight beside Crumlin hospital where accommodation was dreadful. We need to show examples of what people are doing in our communities day to day and what we need to do to help and support them.

Unfortunately, we have also had some bad examples of charities which have abused people’s trust, and this has weakened people’s trust in all charities. It is something we need to work hard on to change. This legislation is part of that work. That is why we need a strong regulator that has the powers to ensure greater transparency, clarity and fairness to enhance public confidence. It is important we have strong regulation and we also need to ensure charities, the vast majority of which are small and medium sized-organisations, many funded by the State, have the ability to deal with the ever-increasing regulations and legislation. We must always seek to strike a balance. One big issue that has caused huge frustration is the ability of people to claim they are charities. We will all have had experience of door-to-door collections, an issue I have raised, as have others, and how people believe these are charities. The Bill would ensure it would be an offence to present as a charity in promotional literature, advertisements or notices. I concur with the Minister of State that if anyone knows of anyone who is purporting to be a charity, they should contact the Charity Regulator on that. People should certainly be very careful when they are donating to what purport to be charities but that may not be registered.

During pre-legislative scrutiny we raised a concern about fundraising on social media and other sites such as GoFundMe. I would like to see this addressed in some way as it is completely unregulated and open to serious abuse and fraud. I would hope that the section that seeks to consolidate existing legislation in relation to offences committed by individuals or groups purporting to be charities or such moneys raised through crowdfunding means it is covered in some way and that we look at that. Part of our recommendation was that we would continue to look at this. I hope that is something the Minister will take on board. The Department states this is currently a small part of fundraising but it also acknowledges that it may change into the future. Surely we should be future-proofing as much as we can in this Bill. We all know the power of social media. Look at the media organisations and another 50 people being laid off. We are seeing a complete change in how people interact and communicate. This is one area that definitely needs some attention.

I am pleased the threshold after which charities must produce accounts has been increased to €25,000. This will benefit up to 744 of those really small charities. They may have an administrator or secretary who is paid full time to do the regulatory-type work and administration. It is also very welcome that the level at which there is a need for an audit is increasing from €100,000 to €250,000. That means a further 1,000 charities will benefit from this change and it is very welcome.

I would like to raise the issue of the wording “significant event”, something which took up substantial time in committee. It is an event or situation that places a charitable organisation or its reputation at significant risk.

I am still really not sure about paragraph (c) in particular. It is very much open to interpretation and could lead to a surge in reporting to the Charities Regulator by charities that are nervous about this section. It could possibly take up an enormous amount of board time and energy. I am a member of a board, and there are probably a lot of us here who are voluntary members of boards, and we joined the boards so that there would be the charity or service we would like to see provided in our communities. However, we see a huge amount of time being taken up with governance. While that is fine in that it is needed and is there for a reason, I still think the wording of that, particularly paragraph (c), just gives too much scope to cause problems for boards and the definition of what significant would be. I envisage there will still be problems regarding that.

There are now a significant number of charities that are companies limited by guarantee, CLGs, and they have another set of governance regulations to follow. Again, this is necessary for confidence. However, we must be careful to strike a balance. My concern would be that it is difficult to attract and retain volunteers, such as members of the community and people with a specific skill set that would be wanted on a board of management. It is difficult to retain them and, as I said earlier, we need to be careful when we put in wording such as "significant event" that we strike a balance.

The Irish Council for Civil Liberties, ICCL, called for the wording to revert to the 2018 guidelines and not the newer 2021 document, which state:

An organisation will be considered to have political purposes if it ... is set up primarily to promote a political cause such as bringing about a change in the law or policies of the Government or other public bodies.

The ICCL states:

We agree that any organisation set up for an exclusively political purpose should not get charitable status. However, it should be open to organisations who have or wish to obtain charitable status to be able to work to advocate politically, to change the laws and to influence policy.

This section is open to interpretation and I would be concerned, along with others, that there should be much more clarity, openness and transparency about the change to the 2018 guidance on this.

Sinn Féin broadly supports the purpose of the Bill and I look forward to working with the Minister to address the issues I and others have raised.

Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire (Cork South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | 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.

Marc Ó Cathasaigh (Waterford, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There will be a large amount of repetition of the contributions made by the Minister of State and members of the main Opposition party. I echo what Deputy Paul Donnelly said about the PLS process in which the committee engaged. It was useful. One of the aspects that was most useful had to do with how there was a fair amount of anxiety when the heads of the Bill were produced. The session with the Charities Regulator was useful in teasing through those concerns. Many of the charities watching that session found that many of their concerns were assuaged when the regulator spoke, particularly around the idea of a proportionality of response, a matter that figured a great deal in the Minister’s contributions at PLS.

I shall rewind a little and repeat a point that should be made, namely, that the charities sector does a great deal of good work. There are many people involved. There is a culture of volunteerism and charity. People just want to muck in and make their communities better. That is an important impulse within Irish society and one that we do not want to put barriers in front of, for example, the issues of governance and responsibilities that one must take on when deciding to become a member of a board or a trustee. We want to make it as easy as possible for people to get involved while ensuring that we have the necessary safeguards.

Something that we need to acknowledge - it has already been acknowledged in this debate - is that the bad behaviour of a small number of charities in the past has had quite a negative impact on the charities sector in general in terms of its ability to fundraise and operate. Across the sector, people who never put a foot wrong in terms of their governance, fundraising and so on have had to deal with reputational damage.

I agree with Deputies that there are functions discharged within society by the charitable sector that more correctly belong to the State. There are whole swathes of the operations that charities do that the State historically has not stepped into or has not stepped into sufficiently. While I value and acknowledge the work of people involved in the charitable sector, there is a responsibility on us as a State to consider those sections that are more appropriate to be under the control of the State. That does not apply to every charity, but applies to some charities and is something that should be considered.

I will pick up on the point made about the advancement of human rights. It is a welcome provision that has been built into the Bill. The people who are examining this Bill, including people in the ICCL, have a slight concern that they do not quite know what has been specified in the Bill, particularly in terms of preparation. They are going to be given six months to prepare, but it would be useful for the Department to pre-engage. This Bill still has quite a way to run and it will revert to our committee for Committee Stage and will be discussed on Report Stage before going to the Seanad. Why not give those outfits a little bit of structure now, engage with their concerns and help them to lay the groundwork so that the clock does not start ticking as soon as the President signs off on the legislation and they find themselves with six months in which to do the work?

I was taken with Deputy Ó Laoghaire’s suggestion about having a little funding for governance. It is difficult to make the case for such funding when fundraising. When people go out shaking buckets and get asked what it will be used for, they will say it will be used to draw up the charity's new governance model. The public are not going to put money into the bucket. They want to get jerseys and footballs, for example. It is not a bad idea to have some dedicated funding. It would actually pay the State back in the long run to give charities a few bob to get their corporate governance structures correct, which would be the only activity for which it could be used. This would have a long-term benefit.

I wish to touch briefly on the PLS report. I thank the staff of the Oireachtas Library and Research Service for the comprehensive Bill digest they produced. Our committee produced nine recommendations, three of which have been accepted in full, three of which have been accepted in part, and three of which have not been accepted. I will run through some of the points that occur to me as I scan through the document. The first concerns the intermediate sanction. The issues that dominated our committee discussions concerned the proportionality of the response and the definition of “significant events”. I served on a school board for many years and we were always horizon scanning, but we need to explain to people in a little more detail what the situation will look like so that, on the one hand, a large number of issues do not arrive into the Charities Regulator that do not need to be dealt with by it at all and, on the other hand, we will not miss things that should be reported.

The idea of using a sledgehammer to crack a walnut was also considered. If an organisation is removed from the charities register, it is done and dusted as a charity. The session with the Charities Regulator was important in this regard because it allayed many of the fears, but the recommendation in our PLS report that we should move to more intermediate sanctions has been taken on in large part in this Bill and is helpful. It should not be a case of one strike and out.

We have to be a little clearer on the wording on political advocacy and ensure we get the balance right. A political party or body instituted for one purpose only should not be regarded as a charity, but we need to get the balance right so that people feel that, as part of their charity work, they can engage in authentic and justifiable political advocacy.

On crowdfunding, this was recommendation No. 9. An example is the "Buy Caio a Pint" GoFundMe in the wake of the horrible atrocity on Parnell Square. It raised €370,000, a sizeable amount of money. As we see digital disruption in so many parts of our society, we need to make sure that when somebody opens a GoFundMe page - there was a whole Joe Duffy episode on that - the money gets to the right person in the end. It is easily abused. It is an area we need to move into. It may not be appropriate for this Bill but as a Government we need to look at how to regulate a new type of fundraising which is not currently adequately covered under legislation.

Christopher O'Sullivan (Cork South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome this Bill and the opportunity to speak about it. Strengthening the role of and support for charities within society is important. I note the Bill strengthens the capacity of the Charities Regulator. We have seen why that has to be the case all too often, unfortunately. Bad practice has cropped up and there is a necessity due to that but in the vast majority of cases, charities are run with good corporate governance in a professional way, often with very few resources. As well as increasing the capacity of the Charities Regulator, we need to increase the capacity of charities to do the work they love doing through legislation and financial support. All TDs in this House work daily with charities in disadvantaged areas, people trying to access homes, women experiencing domestic violence who need refuge and cancer patients who need support. It is across the board. That is why the same themes and issues crop up in contributions around this legislation. The work of cancer services very much supports the State. In some cases, one could argue charities do the work the State should do, directly funded from the Exchequer. That is why they need to be supported and allowed to flourish. It is the same with housing services, urban or rural. There are hard-working charities that represent the Traveller community. I mentioned organisations like the West Cork Women Against Violence Project, an amazing charity that acknowledges the lack of services from the State to support mainly women who experience domestic violence. It is trying its best to provide services, safety, counselling and supports for women in those situations. Arguably, it is work the State should be doing but these groups are out there. I will come back to that point. It is not something we can do in this legislation but there needs to be easier access to funding and a smoother experience when a charitable organisation looks for support from the State so they can access that support and it is not on an ad hocbasis. Unfortunately, that is the case for many of the services.

The Bill references the registration process when a charity originally registers to become a charity. There has to be governance and we must make sure a charity is actually a charity, will be properly run and stacks up in corporate governance. However, in my neck of the woods, for many groups that start up from grassroots level, grow, raise funds and put in place committees and different structures, the next step of registering as a charity becomes quite a big obstacle. I am not saying we should remove all obstacles and let everyone register just with the click of a link on a website, but one must remember that many of these organisations are completely voluntary. They may not have the privilege or comfort of having expert accountants or legal expertise on their board or committee. That creates issues. There is a fantastic charity in west Cork which for the last three or four years has been fighting a battle to build a residential home for adults with autism, which is a big issue in society. Children with autism and intellectual disabilities become adults and the same services and supports are not there that were there previously. This organisation raised thousands through the Kilbrittain Tractor Run, which I believe is the biggest tractor run in Ireland. It has to piggyback on another charitable organisation service user to get funding from the HSE.

When it looked down the path of registering to be a charitable organisation, it found it was far too arduous and would have taken far too long. It did not have the expertise on its board or the supports to do that. It has had to piggyback on another organisation in order to access that funding. When the Department and the Charities Regulator look at a group that is looking to register, they can assess very quickly how authentic a group is and the merits of what it is trying to do so there should be far more assistance with the actual registration. Obviously, there are accounting requirements within a charitable organisation. The experience of the past means this needs to be the case. However, when an organisation is registered as a charity, it relies on volunteers and experts from outside and that whole process needs to be simplified while keeping that same necessity to have corporate governance involved.

I will very quickly come back to the funding part of it. There are far too many unbelievable charitable organisations out there who provide services. I will touch on cancer service for a second. Cancer Connect in west Cork transports thousands of people up to Cork University Hospital for cancer treatment and it is living off scraps from the State in how it funds its organisation going forward. That has to stop. We need to put the organisation on a solid footing. The same is true for ARC Cancer Support House in Cork, which provides counselling services for those who are suffering from cancer or their families. Again, it is living off breadcrumbs. That all needs to stop and the organisation needs to be put on a solid footing.

Frank Feighan (Sligo-Leitrim, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am grateful for the opportunity to discuss this very important charities Bill which, as the House is aware, revises and updates the 2009 Charities Act. I thank the Minister of State for taking time to come to the House today but also for his work in this area.

We are all too aware of the various news stories over the past number of years detailing various accusations. It is a fact that some people involved in working and volunteering in some charities misappropriated funds and used those same organisations for their own betterment and profit. I am glad to see this Bill as a necessary step that needs to be implemented to allow for the right type of regulation, particularly financial regulation, around charities. We need to see public confidence improve and that involves better reporting and key measures around the legal framework. Anybody like me who has been involved in voluntary organisations and charities over the years knows that the amount of regulation, governance and commitment needed drives many people away from voluntary involvement. However, it is necessary. When people think of charities, they think of the likes of health charities that raise funds for cancer, asthma, the deaf and the blind, the organisations that assist people with disabilities and the charities that fund research. They are very worthy causes. Beyond these, many community development organisations which are companies that are registered as a charity do excellent work in the community, for example with the development of enterprise centres, community centres and childcare companies. They are supported by the Minister, Deputy Humphreys, and the Minister of State, Deputy O'Brien, in so many ways.

The Bill includes provisions that will insist that registered charities which are companies will be subject to the same regulatory requirements and rules as all other registered charities, especially around reporting requirements which is a consideration of their size as organisations. These same companies deliver so much to our communities, including vital services that no Government could deliver, and we need these charities. It is in our own interest that an updated legal framework that reflects the reality of operations on the ground is provided for in this Bill. People need the confidence to contribute and the measures in the Bill provide this by giving more power to the regulator, modernising accountancy and reporting procedures, and requesting information on the role of the trustees and their responsibilities and a copy of the members of the company and registered charity. I do not think any of us want to read on a media site of a charity manager, trustee, staff or volunteer walking up the steps of our courts accused of embezzling thousands of euros. The effect this has on the sector overall is quite dramatic. It reduces the general income of the organisation and causes cynicism all around alongside the final decision of the many volunteers who walk away. I say again that we should never judge a charity or an organisation by these kind of deeds. They are a very low percentage. They undermine the confidence, the ability, but also the absolutely wonderful work of these charities.

Regarding community-based companies in rural Ireland, I hope we ensure there is support from the Minister of State's Department and from POBAL to assist directors and volunteers with any new regulations. The last thing we want is owners' responsibility of compliance around paperwork and form-filling driving away volunteers who do a lot of this work for nothing. That is one thing that happened in a lot of organisations. I see it happening in the GAA, the FAI, in rugby, voluntary organisations, credit unions and places like that where governance is required. The days of throwing a load into a car, getting on with it and doing it this way are gone; it is all about governance. Anybody volunteering, assisting, going to work in, or giving their own time to these charities must be responsible and understand the regulations. We need to do an awful lot more to assist these organisations to upskill to ensure they meet that very high bar of regulations that is needed. I ask that the Minister of State ensures his own Department and development companies are funded and staffed to provide support to the charity companies with volunteer directors to comply with any new measures or stipulations under the Bill.

Again, this is very welcome legislation. I thank all the various charities and all their workers and members for the absolutely incredible contribution they have made to our country over many decades. We have to wake up to the fact that life moves on and the days of "We'll try it and see" are over. We need extremely good governance and professional organisations but they come at a cost. I hope that this will not deter anybody who is interested in joining a charity or carrying out charity work. I know it will not but we need to work twice as hard, redouble our efforts, to ensure they get every support from the Government to ensure they can carry out that absolutely wonderful work on behalf of their locality, their charities and indeed their country. I thank the Minister of State again for the work he is doing and I wish him every success.

Michael Collins (Cork South West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I speak fairly often in this Chamber. There are a lot of things on which I would not be well versed but certainly when it comes to the community voluntary sector, that is the sector from which I came and which got me elected to Dáil Éireann so I speak with some level of expertise. I am part of 25 community voluntary groups for a number of years and they have delivered. The sad thing about the Charities Regulator is that there are many groups that have just raised a bit of local money. It might be the Tidy Towns, something from Meals on Wheels or a small thing and now they are regulated to the very last; some of them to the point that they have had to step aside and walk away. I am not saying that regulation is not important. Certainly, regulation should be in place for voluntary or charitable organisations which get funding from the State. However, when people - community voluntary people who, in many cases, are elderly - get letters, they walk away and the organisation collapses. This is what happened during the week when I got a phone call from a group in west Cork who got one of those letters stating that the group had to have its accounts in order or whatever. It had a few quid collected for years. It did a little bit of Tidy Towns work and bought a few flowers when the time came, as well as other little bits. It won a Tidy Towns award. It was a little development association and its members were happy out. They said they would disband and collapse and hand the money that was left to another charitable organisation locally, which is very wrong because they had done no wrong. They had collected no money from the State and the bit of money they collected was honestly given by the local people and happily given back to the local people. The fact is, that is gone and that is after happening in a lot of places.

I would like to ask the Charities Regulator to clarify something. There are organisations that are after collapsing, especially during Covid. There could be tens of thousands of euro gone back into the system. Where did that money go to? Did it go back to the community where the money was taken out of? The organisation could be local. It could be in west Cork, or wherever. It could have had €5,000 in an account, or €55,000. Where did that money end up? It would be very unfair if that was not clarified. We need to know that.

The charity sector has faced several problems recently. Some charities like the Peter McVerry Trust, the Transgender Equality Network Ireland, TENI, ChildFund Ireland, Bóthar and Console have had issues that led to investigations. These problems have hurt the reputation of the charity sector over the past seven years. For example, the ability of a controversial transgender group to retain State funding despite persistent failures to submit accounts and other governance and compliance issues should raise serious questions about the decision-making around the disbursal of taxpayers' money. The Transgender Equality Network Ireland has managed to retain its generous grant funding from the HSE. That is from hard-pressed taxpayers, despite failing to produce audited financial accounts for three years in a row. In 2019, it managed to pull some €470,000 into its pot, with most of that coming from the taxpayer through various sources including the HSE, the Dormant Accounts Fund and through Rethink Ireland etc. In 2021, its income was almost €508,000, again with the most of it coming from public funds. Most of that money was used to fund salaries, yet it was unable to produce audited accounts to the HSE for some reason. Despite TENI's grave financial failings, it has been given extraordinary leeway by Government and the HSE.

Bad actors within the sector mean that all charities have seen a decrease in their income, and one in three charities reported a drop in income due to these scandals. There is a real possibility of a contagion effect from these issues, which could impact public trust. People are concerned about how charities use their money, especially with regard to the high salaries of senior staff. The chief executive of the regulator has advised that not every charity needs a CEO, especially not one who is paid a high salary before any fundraising has been done. She also raised concerns about charities where the CEO is the only employee or one of only two employees. People want to know how their donations are used and what the charity has achieved. Clear information on these areas would increase trust and confidence.

Media reports have highlighted issues with governance and public trust. There was a 13% increase in the number of concerns about charities reported by the public in 2022. Many charities failed to meet their obligations on the governance standards last year, with 41% failing to file their annual finances and activities on time. The chief executive of the regulatory authority has said it is disappointing to see so many charities missing deadlines to submit annual reports about their finances. She said there is a clear link between public trust in the charity sector and transparency and accountability within the sector. However, The Wheel, the national association of charities, community groups and social enterprises, has said that there are resource issues in achieving compliance with the governance process. It argues that the State has invested in developing regulation and compliance processes for the sector but it has not invested in supporting the capacity of charities to comply within these processes.

The Charities Regulator was established in 2014, and is responsible for regulating charitable organisations and protecting charitable assets. It maintains a register of charities, which includes all charities operating in the State. It has a mission to regulate the charity sector in the public interest, ensure compliance with law and support best practice in governance, management and administration. As I said earlier, the issue we have here, especially with organisations like Meals On Wheels, community councils, community carers and community alerts, is that they are all organisations run by volunteers. It does not matter what age they are; they are still volunteers who are giving of their time free. They are meeting with all this regulation, and what is happening is that they are walking away. I know the Minister of State will ask where do we find a fine line here. We certainly have to understand that the majority of community and voluntary work being done out there is being done by volunteers who maybe do not have the expertise to sit down and spend days trawling through paperwork. They basically hand in the bill, pay the cheque for the little bit that was bought so they can put the Meals on Wheels on the table for all the people out there. What we are expecting of them with regard to charities regulation is that they will all be teams of professionals. It is not going to happen, so what we are seeing is a run from organisations of genuinely brilliant people who stepped up to the mark for 20, 30 or 40 years, and who are willing to do it with their bare hands and bare feet. The State does not recognise that, and good God, if anything happens to them, the State will collapse because they are in many ways running our country. I know Cancer Connect in west Cork. Imagine, they sit into their cars, drive up and all that. Some of them may have resources if they link up to another group. However, what is happening is we are starting to lose community and voluntary organisations left, right and centre because we are over-regulated.

Again, I fully understand that if they are getting State money, they certainly have to be accountable. A lot of them certainly are. I look at people who have done some huge work down through the years and have been treated horribly. I have to name one today, and I asked him if I could name him so that I would not in any way damage his reputation. I will not in this case. He is Tony Wilkinson. Tony has been to the Dáil here several times representing Parkinson's Ireland and he is an astonishingly great man. I know it for a fact. I have no reason to praise him above anybody else in this country but the facts are, people were ringing Tony from all over the country because they had Parkinson's. They needed help, and Tony looked outside the box sometimes to get that help for them, and he looked from within the box. However, Parkinson's Ireland decided to get rid of him. It is astonishing.

I am a member of Parkinson's Ireland, so I am well able and within my rights to talk about it. I attended meetings - stormy meetings. There is no Parkinson's Ireland branch in Cork at this present time. There is no functioning branch. There has been no AGM. Parkinson's Ireland is getting State money. It certainly has to be answerable, not the community alert or the community council trying to do a little bit of cleaning around the village while getting no State money. However, Parkinson's Ireland has to be. When we have somebody like Tony, his wife Kate and others, it is totally dependent on the work he did. Then, someone up along the line decided he was stepping on their toes and to get rid of him because he was one step ahead of them. He was delivering on their magazine and on information. There was never a call made that he did not respond to. The problem was, I personally was getting him to respond to other politicians who would talk to me about Parkinson's. I would say to them that this man will explain what could be done. He was an astonishingly outstanding man, and I am very disappointed that Parkinson's Ireland has decided, in its wisdom, to get rid of him, and decided to call an AGM in Cork in September 2023 that never took place. It is now going to get State funding. It has to be called before the health committee and before any regulatory body to explain itself in total. Why is there a situation that we, and I as a member, have no functioning Cork branch at this present time?

It is hard to point the finger at one bad issue because there are so many voluntary organisations I would like to speak about here. I could go on for hours because I was brought up in that sector. I am very passionate. A close family member of mine was at the early stages of Parkinson's and it kind of stuck with me. When the opportunity came to help, I decided to go on and be involved in an organisation that Tony Wilkinson was involved in, and for which he had delivered so much. I am extremely disappointed, and I urge the Minister of State that this is an urgent issue that needs to be resolved. I will be taking the matter up further. It is not just for Tony. It is for all the sufferers of Parkinson's out there who are finding it difficult. Sometimes they need help, and sometimes there is a need to look outside the box.

Getting back to the local groups, it is the local groups I represent in here mainly, not those who get funding. I have no issue with bigger organisations. They have to get funding but the local groups have delivered time and time again in their local communities. We need to make sure that there is a mechanism that protects those groups in this Bill. If they are not protected, and if it is a one-size-fits-all solution here, it is going to lead to the decimation of voluntary organisations in local communities. Whether they are in Bandon, Clonakilty, Schull or wherever, or Goleen and Castletownbere, they are delivering continuously on the ground. They are out every night.

In some cases, it is the same people involved in the different groups. If somebody is good at something, he or she will be asked to participate. However, those people definitely cannot take the workload that is being asked of them. They speak to me about it quite a lot. I mentioned the person from a particular group who rang me the other day and said, that is it. The people in the group cannot do it any longer. I took the letter they sent me to an accountant, who said their accounts would have to be audited. They replied that they probably only process two cheques a year. There is money in their account but the accountant said he was sorry but the letter says it must be done and that is it.

Another issue is that new, genuine community voluntary groups cannot obtain charitable status. Surely to God there is a system whereby groups can obtain that status. Kilbrittain autism centre is an organisation that has contacted me often looking for that. It has collected tens of thousands of euro and wants to be a charitable organisation. However, no matter what angle it has come at the issue from, it has been refused. What are we about here? Are we clearly stating that we do not want new community voluntary groups coming on board that will be strong and will deliver, or have already delivered and want to continue to deliver, for areas all over the country? Are we saying that, in future, we will not allow those organisations to become charitable organisations? It should not be acceptable for any process in this country to take more than two to three months. We are talking about volunteers who are working hard in their communities. They are trying to use the funds they have to pay someone to do something for them. What is happening is astonishing and it is not good enough.

I hope the Minister of State does not think I am in any way attacking anything he is doing. He is very helpful to me whenever I approach him. However, he must look into this issue as part of the provisions of this Bill. If a genuine organisation wants to set up, it must be allowed to do so, once it has completed its paperwork, within a month or six weeks, no questions asked. It should not take 12 months or two years, with all these fences put before people. It just will not work that way. We are pushing more and more people away from the voluntary sector instead of encouraging them. The more they do, the less the State has to do.

I know rural social workers in west Cork who work with community voluntary groups. I am involved in a community council in Goleen. At one time, we had 17 workers through the different schemes. It was a like a factory going in that small village. At the same time, however, none of those involved was any great expert at doing paperwork. I remember someone from Pobal coming down to inspect us one time and, God almighty, it was insane what that man wanted. He upset our brilliant, top-class treasurer, who was a local person doing the job voluntarily. The Pobal man looked for so much paperwork that the treasurer said to me she was finished. She said, "Take my books and go away", and that was the end of it. That is no way to treat people. It is okay if people are well paid but we are talking about volunteers. The man from Pobal was not looking for so much in the grand scheme of things but he made it bloody difficult for us to deliver. I do not know who paid him but he spent two days trying to hoover through our bookwork.

The point I am making is that this is not what the Goleen community council, with its 17 members, was set up to do. It was set up to provide jobs. Our job was to deliver for the community. We built a community centre through volunteers collecting money. We built a community pitch. We did more in Goleen than people in County Kildare told me they had themselves. We did that in west Cork and the pitch is still being used today. Sadly, the population is small but that is a battle for another day. There is a gentleman there at the moment trawling over paperwork the whole time and trying to keep everything under control. He is an ordinary person. He is not an accountant or a professional of any kind, except perhaps a professional at manning his farm. We have to be very careful that we do not overly regulate things and put off people who are delivering locally. As I said, the Goleen community council had 17 people working in that rural community under the rural social scheme, the community employment scheme, HSE schemes and the community services programme. I could name all the schemes one after the other. We had three workers here, two workers there and four over there. They were great and we still have 11 or 12 of them. They delivered for the community by strimming the grass in the graveyards, keeping the streets clean and, when we had no local authority workers, they maintained the pitch and kept the community centre and meals on wheels service going. That is just a fraction of what was going on.

We must be careful not to throw the baby out with the bathwater. If things become overly regulated, there is a problem. I mentioned Parkinson's Ireland. There are a lot of genuine organisations out there but we are looking to regulate them too tightly. We are throwing all the voluntary community alert schemes, community councils, community carers and business associations under the one umbrella where they do not fit. These people are not getting paid. I never see anybody in my community council, or the community alert scheme and the two community care schemes in which I am involved, getting a brown cent for the work they do. We are regulating them so much that some of them are walking away. As I said, one person did that last week. We are overly regulating things for ordinary, small community voluntary groups.

I urge the Minister of State to give time and thought to this issue. He has such organisations in his constituency, the same as I have them in mine. They have delivered for communities, handing out meals on wheels to people living on their own, visiting people and putting in pendant alarms for them. I have to mention two people who died recently in west Cork. Denis O'Neill and Pat McCarthy delivered diligently to their community. Alan Finn in Schull is another. They were three great community volunteers who unfortunately passed away within a short time of each other. They never looked for a brown cent for all they did for people in their communities. They wanted to do it for the good of the community. They saw the community centre and pitch built and the 12 new houses in Schull. Their organisations built those facilities. They did not touch any funds other than working with the bodies that are out there to deliver for the community. People like them will walk away at some stage if we pressurise them any more. The bigger charitable groups with CEOs have the finances and know-how to do the figures. We must spare a serious thought for the ordinary community voluntary organisations.

Under the current charities regulation regime, organisations have collapsed, including some in my constituency. I would like to know where that money goes and who has the authority to spend it. I will be told it is a matter for the Charities Regulator. My argument is that, surely be to God, if an organisation has €20,000 and the elderly people who volunteer in it are giving up and walking away, that €20,000 should be distributed back into the community in grants or some other way, not taken away and handed out to whomever. If an organisation based in Dublin closes, I would not expect its funding to come to west Cork, or vice versa. I know of organisations that have collapsed and their moneys have been taken back. They are left with zero funds and zero delivery for those communities.

Joe O'Brien (Dublin Fingal, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank all the Deputies who contributed to the debate. I appreciate the broad support for the Bill. I will use my time to address some of the issues raised.

Reference was made to crowd funding platforms, including GoFundMe. Crowd funding tends to occur where a person or group seeks donations for an individual or a specific cause, such as seeking funds to pay for treatment for someone who is ill. In most instances, the requisite public benefit element of the charity test would not be met in such cases and they would not be required to apply to register as a charity. The Charities Regulator has no role in regard to fundraising by persons or groups that are not charities other than to ensure such persons or groups do not hold themselves out as charities in contravention of the Act. Where it comes to the attention of the regulator that a person or group is fundraising in contravention of the Act, by referring to themselves or holding themselves out as a charity, the regulator will endeavour to make contact with the person or group concerned, along with the fundraising platform, to address the matter. In short, a lot of the GoFundMe pages referenced are private operations that do no classify as charities and, therefore, are outside the scope of this legislation. It is a question of buyer beware, for want of a better phrase, for people who are thinking of donating to a page like that. They need to check whether the fundraiser is a charity and, if it is not, they are taking a big risk.

Questions were raised in respect of significant events.

On consideration of observations made during pre-legislative scrutiny and in line with other common law jurisdictions, the statutory requirement to report significant events has been removed. That is important to say. There is not now a statutory requirement to report what we described as "significant events". As also recommended in the pre-legislative scrutiny report, a definition of "significant event" has now been included in the statute as well. It relates to three general descriptions: substantial damage to property, substantial reduction or loss in assets, or an event or situation that places the charitable organisation or its reputation at significant risk. In time, the regulator will be able to give more detailed guidance on what that is about which will put people's minds at ease. The key message here is that it is not a statutory requirement to report. There will be guidance developed in time to assist people in that regard.

On the political advocacy point, the legislation is very clear and I have gone through this myself a number of times. Under the provisions of the Charities Act 2009, a registered charity can already conduct political advocacy as part of its work once it meets all the following three requirements: it relates directly to the advancement of its charitable purpose, it does not promote a political party or candidate, and it is not contrary to the charity's governing document. Obviously, the regulator provides the guidance, but it is available to the Minister to provide directions to the regulator where necessary in that regard. To me, the legislation is quite clear in this regard but I am happy to engage with the ICCL on other aspects of that.

Unfortunately, Deputy Collins has left because he raised some very good points. It is a shame he is not here now for me to reassure him that this Bill will actually help those groups he was talking about quite a lot because it will raise the threshold. It will also lower the administrative burden for many of those smaller groups. It is also worth saying that a lot of those small groups he described would not meet the charity test. They would not be required to register as charities because of the nature of their operations. There are gradations. The Deputy mentioned one size fits all. This is quite the opposite. We have gradations of requirements for different levels of people.

Deputy Collins also made the point that certain money is collected from the public, and if it is State money, there should be higher thresholds. The very point of the regulator is that it is protecting money that people have donated. That is still money that is of the public, at least, and it is the regulator's job to protect that money.

The Deputy referenced an organisation that was engaged with HSE. It is important to flag that this organisation is not a registered charity so it does not come under the scope of this legislation. I would hope that, overall, the changes will encourage people to get involved in charities.

I acknowledge the observations of all the stakeholders, including the joint committee, which conducted pre-legislative scrutiny on the general scheme. Reflecting on the pre-legislative scrutiny report, I have carefully considered the recommendations contained in the report and I have taken into account, where relevant, those areas that require greater clarification and further consideration.

As I set out in my opening address, the approach taken in this Bill reflects the scale and complexity of the organisations that make up the charity sector in Ireland. The measures proposed will introduce greater transparency to the way in which charities report, enhancing public confidence in the sector. This Bill is a key step that needs to be implemented to allow for the appropriate regulation, particularly financial regulation, of the sector. I assure Members that the issue of proportionality has been reviewed at length in the preparation of the Bill and will continue to be as it progresses through the Houses. This is evidenced through the proposed amendments that will provide for an increase in the financial thresholds that currently apply and to ensure more appropriate reporting requirements that are reflective of a charity's size.

The introduction of accounting regulations and charity statement of recommended practice, SORP, as provided for in this Bill, will provide assistance to charities, donors and the regulator by standardising the layout of financial statements for all charities and clarifying what information the financial statement should contain. This will allow charities to be regulated in a more consistent and transparent manner.

These are all actions which will ultimately further enhance public trust and confidence in the sector. There is an identified need for proportionate regulation and governance requirements for charities. It is important we strike the right balance between necessary regulation and proportionate governance.

I must reiterate the Charities Regulator's approach to compliance is very much one of early and ongoing engagement with charities when issues arise and working with them to bring them into compliance. The Bill will not change this adopted approach. On the contrary, it seeks to further develop proportionality within the process. By way of example, as previously described, the Bill seeks to extend the circumstances in which an intermediate sanction can be used to avoid prosecution and bring the charity into compliance as this is a more proportionate response in most cases

A number of the amendments proposed will also ensure incorporated charities will now be subject to the same regulatory requirements and rules as other registered charities, especially in respect of financial reporting and audit requirements. This legislation will ensure a balanced approach continues, with a commitment to fair procedures and adherence to the rules of natural justice. To reaffirm, the core objective of this legislation is to provide an updated legal framework that reflects the reality of operations on the ground, which will ensure our charities continue to thrive.

I once again extend my appreciation to the joint committee. I acknowledge the engagement of the Charities Regulator, which worked closely with my Department in preparing this important legislation. I also record the significant work of the Office of Parliamentary Counsel, which assisted my officials in the drafting of this Bill. In particular, I acknowledge the contributions to the process to date of the community and voluntary sector. This includes The Wheel, Charities Institute Ireland and the Irish Council for Civil Liberties. I look forward to further proactive and detailed engagement with Members of the House on Committee Stage on the provisions contained in the Bill.