Charity begins at home, not the Beehive
The meaning of a charity hasn’t changed in a century, but there is still confusion, writes Jo Goodhew .
WHEN people think of ‘‘charity’’ they often think of their own, or others’, acts of charity: the gold coin in the bucket, the response to a letter seeking a donation, the automatic deduction.
They may also think wider, to their own and others’ voluntary activity: support for a neighbour, staffing a help line or working to improve the environment.
In nearly all of this, the law and the state play little part. It is about people, and their own decisions and goodwill to others. As the minister, this is certainly the way I want it. People don’t need my help, or officials’ help in deciding to be charitable, and how.
With 27,000 registered charities in New Zealand, whose annual income is around $15 billion, it makes sense for there to be some government oversight to promote public confidence in charitable entities, and charitable giving.
The meaning of ‘‘charitable status’’ is the same now as it was 10 years ago, and even 100 years ago. Where the law seems unclear, as it did with some sporting activity, the government moves to clarify it.
To be a charity, organisations must have a charitable purpose (such as the ‘‘advancement of education’’ or ‘‘promotion of health’’) that benefits a significant section of the public, rather than primarily an elite few.
For example, sports organisations can be registered as charities when they use their facilities and activities exclusively for charitable purposes. However, if their activities predominantly support only a few people, such as ‘‘elite athletes’’ they can’t be registered as charities. The reason is simple: Charities must benefit the wider community.
Any charity whose activities appear to be outside the rules is given every opportunity to realign their affairs, before de-registration is considered, and are directly supported by charities services to help them do this.
Recent high-profile decisions to deregister specific charities have prompted concerns that there may be some sort of ‘‘crackdown’’ on charities. There is not. Charities are now better informed about their responsibilities, and held to account when they do not do what is legally expected of a charity. Some choose to voluntarily de-register and carry on their activities without registration – as they are free to do.
People can be confident New Zealand’s charities law is working well, and as intended.
As minister I do not, and by law cannot, make decisions about the registration or de-registration of charities – an independent Charities Registration Board makes those decisions. A small, focused team within the Department of Internal Affairs provides support and education, and checks that charities are providing the information they should, and staying within the legal boundaries of charitable activity. In rare cases the independent board de-registers charities.
My role is to exercise oversight of the efficiency of the investment the government makes in supporting the charitable sector, and to ensure the law is working well and meeting the needs of those involved in charity.
There is now far more information about charities available than ever before, and far better oversight to ensure that organisations which say they are charitable, are. Internal Affairs’ charities services website records details of all registered charities, showing the work they do, how they spend their money, and where the money comes from. This helps the media and others hold charities to account, and helps people make well-informed choices about giving, from the smallest amount right through to very large bequests.
It is over to generous members of the public to decide how to donate, and to which charities, and over to those charities to demonstrate the effectiveness of their work.