A distorted view of the charitable sector

Ian Bell paints a picture of a charity sector that is in thrall to government, desperate for money and a poor replacement for the state. His article lurches from one criticism of the sector to another – from ‘chugging’ to chief executive salaries, from transparency to independence from government. However, it singularly fails to acknowledge the overwhelmingly positive impact of charitable activity and the crucial role that charities play in our society. Yes, charities are now delivering more public services than ever, but they do it very well. Yes, charities receive a lot of money from government and the public, but they use it well. Ultimately isn’t that what matters most? Charities also have the advantage of working on the ground, they know the needs of their clients, they are led by an ethos that gives people a real say in their futures, and they consistently demonstrate that the services they provide make an impact. The view expressed in the article that charities are not accountable when delivering public contracts will be particularly difficult to understand for anyone working in the sector. Those who compile the statistics, do the finances and complete the numerous and comprehensive reports will be unconvinced by the need for greater accountability.

"While valid concerns must be identified, scaremongering and media manipulation of facts will not help move this process forward"

The article states that there are over 2,000 charities working with children as if that was a bad thing. Think of all the local scout groups across Scotland, charities providing services for children with disabilities, literacy groups, campaigning, advocacy… the list goes on. Would it be preferable to have one homogenous ‘children’s charity’ trying to do all these things? The number of charities is part of the strength of the sector – representing and supporting the diverse people and communities across Scotland. He goes on to refer to the link between the death of Olive Cooke and charitable fundraising – a link that has been firmly rejected by her family. A review of fundraising practice is underway, which was set up to identify and tackle any problems in this area. An important element of this will be gathering and assessing what the public thinks of current fundraising activity.  Fundraising is vital to support the work of charities small and large and while valid concerns must be identified, scaremongering and media manipulation of facts will not help move this process forward. The article also seems to suggest that charities are all following David Cameron’s ‘Big Society’ vision. This couldn’t be further from the truth, particularly in Scotland where the reality behind the rhetoric was clear at an early stage and the concept identified as toxic by many in the sector. The charitable sector is not perfect, and it should continue to reflect on its mistakes and work to improve on them. A part of this is accepting criticism where it is valid. But it’s also important that we don’t’ jump to conclusions based on isolated examples or misrepresented facts. This only serves those who wish to see charities role diminished and their voice stifled.