Scottish charities must resist the imposition of new controls on fundraising being planned by Westminster, or risk being driven out of business, according to an expert.
Ian MacQuillin, of Plymouth University’s Centre for Sustainable Philanthropy, will warn this week that charities may as well pack up and go home, if members of the public are able to opt out of any contact from charities seeking donations.
"In lots of ways this is a piledriver to crack a nut. If it goes ahead, charities needn't exist, fundraisers can go and do other things," he said.
Mr MacQuillin is director of Rogare, the Fundraising Think Tank, and will speak at a summit meeting for Scotland's charities on Thursday which is being held to respond to the reviews of fundraising methods and practices published recently in both Scotland and England.
These in turn were in response to a series of controversies about fundraising, largely south of the border, including the suicide of 93 year old Olive Cooke in Bristol. She was allegedly upset at the time about excessive requests from charities.
The UK Government is pressing charities in England and Wales to accept a new regulator and a 'fundraising preference service' which will give people the right to opt out of being contacted by anyone seeking charitable donations. However the Scottish review, commissioned by the Scottish Council for Voluntary Organisations (Scvo) did not call for this service - similar to the one which lets people opt out of cold calling on the telephone.
Mr MacQuillin said the idea was unworkable and would harm more vulnerable people than it protected.
"There is an idea that all regulation must focus on what members of the public want - but what about the beneficiaries of charities?" he said. "Charities are being told to put donors at the heart of what they do, but if you do that you move your beneficiaries out to the periphery. There needs to be a balance between the two."
While the focus of concern has been vulnerable people affected by charity requests, many vulnerable people benefit from the services provided by charities, he said.
Mr MacQuillin said the psychology of the charitable giving was the reason why it would be so damaging. "People give to charity because someone asks them too. They may be moved by a cause, or affected by adverts, or images, but we know from research the turning point is when someone asks them. People have this myth that they give to the charities they choose to, when they choose, but the reality is they don't."
If someone uses the opt out service, perhaps after a bad experience with one charity, every other charity will then be banned from contacting them, Mr MacQullin added. "Members of the public may think 'even if I opt out of charities contacting me I'll still give to those I like.' But usually they won't If you can't ask people to give to charity you will raise much less money, it is as simple as that."
UK minister for civil society Rob Wilson is holding a summit to which 50 charities have been summoned and intends passing legislation to enforce the changes.
The Scvo's report called for reforms to be led by charities themselves, and the Scottish Government appears to support that.
"Scotland should absolutely stick to its guns about this," Mr McQuillin added. "It could lead the way."
John Downie, director of public affairs at scvo, which is hosting the summit at Edinburgh International Conference Centre, said it was important vulnerable people were not inundated with requests from charities.
Scottish charities have an opportunity to take a lead over the regulation of fundraising, he said: "Our very autonomy is at risk. The real question is: are charities in Scotland happy to let the distant drones of Westminster decide on how fundraising should be regulated, or are we going to do it for ourselves.
"I think we should grasp this opportunity to design a system that works for everyone – donors, charities and, of course, beneficiaries."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel