Leon Ward is worried about recent statements from the sector that there may be too many charities.
Sam Younger’s recent comments about limiting the number of charities that register with the Charity Commission, coupled with the comments of RNIB’s chief executive, Lesley-Anne Alexander, on assessing need within a charitable area really do worry me.
By imposing a system that strips out the creation of new organisations, the Commission will do the entire sector a disservice, and run against core trends across the public and private sectors which encourage innovation and creativity. The sector is not so special, different and unique that it can afford such an act of self-imposed vandalism. Such a policy will be stamping heavily on the hopes and dreams of those individuals that want to create a local solution to a local need.
While I understand the debate around the concept of 'too many charities doing the same thing', regulating potential new charities out of existence at birth is not the answer. Rather, this discussion needs contextualising.
The majority of very small and community-focused organisations are born out of local people who have the passion, energy and drive to try and help others. They do not see themselves as competitors to big charities; heck, often they only become a charity so that they can hold a coffee morning to raise a little bit of income, only to then find themselves bogged down with the regulatory aspects of registering.
And to Lesley-Anne's comments, the fact that an un-met local need has been identified often simply demonstrates the fact that other charities haven't quite been able (or have chosen not) to address this as yet. Accordingly, we should step back and allow others the chance to succeed. Imposing, as she suggests, a "time-based delay and research obligation" when these organisations have £0 is both nonsensical and is not sensible - because it simply will not happen.
We should also remember that while groups of similarly driven charities may be aiming to 'solve' the same problem, the way they do this varies hugely, from one organisation to the other. Allowing free flow into the sector promotes, protects and encourages innovation, creativity and collaboration - vital components of a healthy, responsive and vibrant economy. In this respect, market forces can be powerfully beneficial. If an organisation has run out of steam, energy and momentum, and cannot generate enough income, either from individuals or grant makers to sustain itself, then it should merge or dissolve – and let new bodies take up the challenge. Preventing such will do the sector nothing but harm.
The bottom line? A ‘one charity’ model most certainly does not fit all, and the Commission should steer clear of trying to impose such a model for its own benefit of reducing administration. Such a policy can only encourage and breed complacency - and a smaller number of ever-growing bureaucracies. We head down that road, and we have lost the very essence of what our sector is meant to be about.
