The charitable sector is generally held in high regard by the population at large, but it is not perfect and there are some examples of charities and their Trustees acting in a manner that is in conflict with all reasonable expectations of good governance. Charitable activity is regulated by the Charity Commission an organisation that was established by the Government to ensure that the sector is well run. In line with the austerity measures introduced by the coalition, the charity commission has seen its budget slashed over recent years as I wrote recently. It is understandable that Parliament has its own views on the running of Charities, even if from time to time their focus can be a bit too political and show a level of ignorance of the sector. A recent article in the Daily Telegraph which criticised the pay of senior staff in a very small number of charities is a good example of this when the MP for Witham, Priti Patel decided to criticise the 14 leading overseas aid charities without any context in terms of the 163,000 charities in operation, or explanation as to why these particular charities have been chosen. Sadly, Sir William Shawcross, the Chairman of the Commission added his own voice to the criticism, even though his own pay exceeds half of those being criticised despite the fact that they run charities, much larger and more complex than the Charity Commission itself. At the end of last year Eric Pickles produced a handy guide for Local Government to help Councils save money. It included the recommendation “37. Cease funding ‘sock puppets’ and ‘fake charities’: Many pressure groups – which do not deliver services or help the vulnerable – are now funded by state bodies. In turn, these nominally ‘independent’ groups lobby and call for more state regulation and more state funding.” No doubt a more robust search of interventions by Party Politicians would reveal further examples. At one level, even where the intervention is a misjudgement and poorly executed, it is surely right that our elected representatives should apply their scrutiny to any failures by charities, ensuring the hard won reputation for the sector is maintained.

The Charity Commission website provides very useful advice for the running of charities and states “Making decisions is one of the most important parts of the trustee role. Some decisions are simple and straightforward, others can be complex or far reaching in their consequences.” Some charities such as the ones Priti Patel criticised are very complex and these place a high demand on their Trustees, but the majority of charities are governed with only very modest demands being placed on their Trustees. However becoming a Trustee is an important task. As the website states “Trustees have overall control of a charity and are responsible for making sure it’s doing what it was set up to do” It would be concerning if a Trustee was unaware of their responsibilities and had no recollections of becoming a Trustee. A form is filled in when people become Trustees and an annual update is filed each year confirming that the basic details are still correct.

One would imagine that someone who was trained as a lawyer would be more conscious than most of the responsibilities of such a role and someone who has been the most powerful lawyer in the country even more so. Kenneth Harry Clarke who is a QC was Lord Chancellor and Justice Minister from 2010 – 2012. He has recently discovered that he has been a Trustee of a Charity for around a decade, although he is not entirely sure and the publicly available accounts on file do not go far enough back to check. His admission came earlier this year in Parliament as this transcript reveals. The Charity is known as the Bildeberg Association. It was established to facilitate meetings that take place every year with a very distinguished invitation list. These names include senior Industrialists, Government Ministers, Shadow Ministers and many others. The intention is that this group of around 120 people gather to discuss issues that could have a profound impact on you and I and the economies of many nations. There is no suggestion that any Government money is given to this charity (although the accounts do not make this clear). However some people might argue that this is a fake charity or even a ‘sock puppet’, although that of course depends on the exact meaning of these phrases. The Bilderberg meetings are mired in some controversy in part because of the secrecy involved, although there is no reason to assume that there are any matters of concern. When Ken Clarke spoke in this  debate he said, “this is the first time I have ever risen in the House of Commons to answer questions on behalf of a private organisation for which the British Government have absolutely no responsibility” He was right to say that as a charity, the Government has no responsibility for the Bildeberg Association, although as I have outlined such a line has been crossed by other MPs and Ministers before. However the real responsibility for answering such questions falls not to the Minister without Portfolio in HM Government but to Ken Clarke and the other two Trustees, that is exactly what our charitable law provides them for. This makes his ignorance all the more concerning. Let us hope that this charity is better run than this moment of scrutiny suggests. More details regarding the charity can be found on the website, the charity number is 272706.