Ideas@TheCentre
Parliament must let charities speak out
Charities can act for the public benefit not only by helping their clients but also by calling on legislators and policy makers to make considered changes to the law.
Take the troubling case of British bees. According to the beekeepers’ charity the British Beekeepers Association (BBKA), one third of all honey bee colonies were wiped out during the last northern winter.
Loss of habitat, increased use of pesticides, and even, apparently, climate change, were all factors contributing to the apian crisis.
In response, the BBKA is training apiarists to adapt to the situation.
By contrast, the more activist-minded Friends of the Earth is not only encouraging the public to plant bee-friendly flowers. It is also urging British ministers to take steps to protect bees. Does the call for ‘bee-friendly’ policies amount to political lobbying?
In general, charities must be careful to ensure their activism doesn’t morph into lobbying, that is, the action of taking a specific issue to elected representatives in the hope of obtaining a specific outcome.
Here in Australia, new draft legislation currently before the Federal Parliament promises to help charities be clear about what they can and can’t do.
The Charities Bill 2013, now before the House of Representatives, proposes to enshrine part of the High Court’s 2010 decision in Aid/Watch Incorporated v Commissioner of Taxation in which a majority of the justices held that ‘in Australia there is no general doctrine which excludes from charitable purposes “political objects”.’
The Court also held that when it comes to the relief of poverty, a charity may pursue its charitable purpose by generating public debate.
Much of the bill, which also wants to replace the tried and tested common law definition of charity with a new statutory definition, seems unnecessary. But the proposed clarification of the law about the scope of charitable purpose is to be welcomed.
It would mean that a charity is still pursuing its charitable purpose even when it is engaged in public debate about a law or government policy which relates to one of the eleven statutory charitable purposes.
Critics worry that charities will spend more time pounding on the doors of lawmakers than doing charitable work. But charities often have highly specialised knowledge about their areas of social and civic life.
By allowing charities actively to generate public debate about those areas, Parliament is likely to be helping them to contribute further to the strength of civil society. Everyone stands to benefit from that. And one day, Australian bees may thank us, too.
Peter Kurti is a Research Fellow at The Centre for Independent Studies.
