The great NGO giveaway – so who does the Government not support?

Last week there were calls to give less money to non-governmental organisations (NGOs) on the one hand and more money to farmers and small businesses on the other. Who is right? Where is the balance?

Charity is a big business. According to The Wheel, Ireland’s national association of charities, community groups and social enterprises, there are almost 10,000 registered charities and more than 20,000 organisations in Ireland’s wider non-profit sector. The sector has a combined annual turnover of over €14.5bn and employs over 190,000 staff.

A report published by the Charities Regulator in 2018 estimated that the impact of the work of Ireland’s charities exceeds €24bn.

To put this in context, the value of Ireland’s food, drink and horticulture exports were almost €16.3bn in 2023, while Ireland earned €5.3bn from overseas tourists in the same year. NGO spending appears to contribute more than agriculture and tourism combined. That is a lot of money.

It is important to be clear that volunteerism is a very wide activity that spans everything from a local bridge club to an approved housing body. Similarly, there is a very wide range of types and sizes of charities — ranging from local meals-on-wheels operations to huge hospitals.

While there is a lot of overlap between the world of NGOs and charities, there are also important differences. Not all NGOs are charities involved in giving. Many address a social or political issue.

Ireland has transferred a very large number of public services to NGOs in sectors from health and education to environmental monitoring. This serves the twin purposes of distancing responsibility from civil servants and politicians, while also hoping to get cheaper public services.

However, it is now clear that this approach comes with a cost — these NGOs are now demanding more of a say in the content of public services.

It is globally recognised that the lack of democratic oversight or accountability is the key weakness to the NGO sector — both because of the potential for financial irregularities and because of undemocratic and unrepresentative agenda-setting for public policy.

Powerful and well-funded NGOs can distort public services away from the priorities democratically established for the common good, and towards issues in which they are active.

In public debates about the role and size of NGOs, it can be important to remember that the political parties who may be challenging the sector are also NGOs. So, too, are the many organisations that represent economic activities, such as farming, hospitality and the construction sector.

While these groups are not charities, they still lobby the Government for financial support for their sector. And lobbying is where the world of NGOs starts to have problems — because they cross over the line into advocacy.

Using public money to lobby for more public money presents a challenge. Figures published by homeless charities, for example, show wages and salaries expenditures by one NGO on advocacy was in excess of half-amillion euro in one year.

A similar pattern exists in charities for nature, with one leading NGO spending over 10pc of its annual income and 20pc of its government grant on advocacy.

So we see economic actors such as house builders and farmers being outraged that the public purse is being used to fund what they see as persecution by NGO advocacy — yet the same groups similarly call for money from the Government to support their vital contribution to society and the economy, such as last week’s call by farmers for more fodder support.

Perhaps the real issue is one of self-interest by various NGOs who fear competition for limited public funds, while also objecting to “free money” for anything that they disagree with.

If we accept that society needs NGOs and that they often represent humanity at its very best, then the issue moves away from whether we should support NGOs towards how we can help them to be their best selves.

Sometimes it can be argued that NGOs need the oversight of society to overcome their own blind spots.

For instance, in 2018 a survey found that there were 48 non-profit organisations which were directly involved in some form of suicide care including counselling, prevention and information.

Is it possible that consolidation would improve the funding and outcomes for those in need of care in such dreadful circumstances?

Over-reach by NGOs can quickly harm the whole sector, as was vividly illustrated in Sweden last week. There, the new government announced that at the end of the year it will terminate all its funding agreements with Swedish foreign aid NGOs.

Perhaps the best way for the sector to help society is by first addressing its own governance, regulatory managerial and operational challenges.

We all lose if we fail to address the duplication of functions, together with a better articulation of appropriate advocacy by NGOs.

Using public money to lobby for even more public money poses a challenge