SPCS

SOCIETY FOR PROMOTION OF COMMUNITY STANDARDS INC.

Greenpeace declined charity status but now seeks Supreme Court ruling on its political advocacy

by Leave a Comment

Greenpeace, after having lost its bid to the Charities Commission for charity status,  has recently won a case in the Court of Appeal allowing it to reapply to the Charities Registration Board (now part of the Department of Internal Affairs, following the disestablishment of the Commission). However, rather than reapplying at this stage, the environmental lobby group’s lawyer, Davey Salmon, has applied to the Supreme Court to try and overturn the lower Court’s decision on two grounds, including the extent to which political advocacy is allowed.

The National Business Review reports:

In November, Justices Rhys Harrison, Lyn Stevens and Doug White set aside the then-Charities Commission’s 2010 decision to decline the lobbyists’ charity status.

Greenpeace says whatever the outcome of the Supreme Court appeal, the bid for charity status will still need to be reconsidered.

The Court of Appeal judges referred the Greenpeace application back to the Charities Commission’s replacement – the Department of Internal Affairs and the Charities Registration Board for reconsideration.

In its finding, the Court of Appeal said the organisation’s political advocacy needs to be “truly ancillary” to its principal charitable objectives.

The lobby group’s political involvement was central to the then-Charities Commission’s refusal to grant the application.

Back in 2010, the commission found:

  • Two of Greenpeace’s objectives – promoting “peace” and “disarmament” – were political, not charitable.
  • Greenpeace was involved in illegal activities, such as trespassing; therefore it was not maintained exclusively for charitable purposes as illegal purposes are not charitable.

In its decision, the commission also referred to a number of mission statements on the Greenpeace website, including:

  • We are actively campaigning for international disarmament.
  • We believe greater peace, greater security, greater safety is possible. Reaching out across national boundaries Greenpeace is working with citizens and political leaders around the world to make this happen.

In order to be registered as a charity an organisation must be established and maintained exclusively for charitable purposes. Political purposes are not charitable purposes.

An organisation may, however, be registered as a charity if it has a political purpose so long as the political purpose is ancillary to the charitable purposes of the organisation and is not an independent purpose.

A date has yet to be set for the Supreme Court hearing.

Source:

Political Greenpeace unhappy with charity win – wants more

By Blair Cunningham. Monday March 11, 2013

http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/political-greenpeace-unhappy-charity-win-wants-more-bc-137076

See Court of Appeal Ruling:

http://www.charities.govt.nz/assets/docs/registration/judgments/GreenpeaceNZIncmediarelease.pdf

SAFE – Save Animals from Exploitation (a registered charity) demands ban on rodeo “animal abuse industry”

by Leave a Comment

Save Animals From Exploitation (S.A.F.E.), a registered charity (Reg. No CC40428) with the Charities Commission, is an “animal rights activist”/political advocacy lobby group demanding law changes to safeguard animals from claimed abuse. As part of their “animal advocacy” crusades, SAFE charity workers have used tactics such as flamboyant and high profile publicity stunts, harrassment of business enterprises and their employees and patrons, civil disobedience and civil disruption.

Fairfax Media reports today that SAFE executive director Hans Kriek has described the government’s rodeo code as “complete nonsense” and rodeos as “essentially an animal abuse industry”. SAFE is demanding government legislate for a complete ban on the sport nationwide.

The 2003 Rodeo Code of Welfare, which sets the minimum standards of care and best practice for rodeos, is under review and Kriek has stated:

“We see no point at all in the review of the code. We will make it clear to the Government that it is time to ban rodeos. Every single animal rights organisation is against rodeos.”

However, Canterbury Vets owner Steve Williams and Canterbury SPCS manager Geoff Sutton disputed this claim at the Methven Rodeo yesterday.

Mr Williams, who vetted every animal at the ground yesterday, said organisers went above and beyond the current code of practice. He does not allow animals to compete if they are not up to the task.

Safe Campaign Manager Mandy Carter, stated in a media release dated 19 April 2012:

“Rodeos are merely a cruel display of man’s dominance and abuse of animals. These animals are forced to endure needless suffering and gross mistreatment, all for the sake of so-called entertainment. There is simply no excuse”.

As part of its political advocacy campaign, SAFE is demanding that government establish a Commissioner for Animals, a new office outside the Ministry for Primary Industries, which could independently represent animal welfare.

SAFE, which describes itself as “the leading animal advocacy group”, received $691,268 from public charity (tax-deductible) donations in the financial year ended 31 March 2011. It spent $589,430 – on paying the salaries and wages of nine full-time and five part-time staff charity workers.  Its financial accounts for the year ended 31 March 2012, that were due on 30 September 2012, are overdue and yet to be filed with the Charities Commission.

References:

1. Ban rodeos, activist says. By Charlie Mann. 22 October 2012.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/7845946/Ban-rodeos-activist-says

2. Charities Commission website. www.charities.govt.nz

3. SAFE Media Release 19 April 2012.

Animal Advocacy Group Angered at Rodeo Inaction

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/AK1204/S00441/animal-advocacy-group-angered-at-rodeo-inaction.htm

4. SAFE Media Release 21 August 2012

Government urged to make high animal welfare standards a reality

http://www.safe.org.nz/images.php?oid=16798

5.  SAFE (Save Animals From Exploitation) – a registered charity & its “political advocacy”

https://www.spcs.org.nz/wp-admin/post.php?post=4078&action=edit

6. https://www.spcs.org.nz/wp-admin/post.php?post=3446&action=edit

7. https://www.spcs.org.nz/wp-admin/post.php?post=3497&action=edit

Registered charities and the proposed Lobbyists’ Code of Conduct and Register of Lobbyists

by Leave a Comment

Under legislation proposed by Green MP Ms Ms Holly Walker, people who receive pay for lobbying MPs about laws or policies and who fail to register with the Attorney-General as paid lobbyists, could face criminal charges. The Lobbying Disclosure Bill, drawn from the parliamentary ballot on 21 April 2012, seeks to bring transparency to the activities of all paid lobbyists who attempt to sway and influence legislative processes by communicating with MPs. The bill proposes that the Auditor-General be empowered to investigate any alleged breaches of a Lobbyists’ Code of Conduct, which all paid lobbyists must agree to and sign, before they can lawfully engage in the lobbying of MPs. The Auditor-General will also be empowered to remove or suspend persons from a Register of Lobbyists if they breach the Code of Conduct.

Ms Walker wants regular statistics to be gathered on all paid lobbyists and the data regularly collated and reviewed, so the public, government officials and a host of enforcement agencies can closely scrutinise all their activities.

If her proposed bill, as drafted, passes into law, charities registered with the Charities Commission, such the the New Zealand Aids Foundation (NZAF), that are heavily engaged in political advocacy and lobbying AND receive significant government funding (see below); will need to have all and every one of their paid lobbyists sign a Lobbyists’ Code of [ethical] Conduct and register their personal details on the Register of Lobbyists.

Failure to do so prior to watching a rugby match from a NZAF-sponsored corporate box, or watching a NZAF-sponsored modelling pageant, alongside any MP or MPs, regardless of their gender, age, race, religion, political affiliation or sexuality; might lead to an unauthorised NZAF lobbyist having criminal charges being laid against him or her. Such unauthorised lobbyists attending a Big Gay Out event or a Hero Parade, who might be photographed or filmed arm-in-arm with an MP, whilst indulging in “political advocacy,” may face the prospect of being charged with criminal activity (lobbying).

Once charged, the NZAF charity worker accused would be required in make a credible defence to the Attorney-General, disclosing the range of presumably “gay” friendly legislative issues discussed with the friendly MP, and the methods used in the lobbying campaign, if any.

Authorised NZAF lobbyists who face charges over alleged breaches of the Code  will have to rely on the official records made of their lobbying encounters as recorded by the friendly MPs as well as their own diary records and any corroborating evidence provided by Big Gay-Out/Hero Parade participants/witnesses.

(NZAF, a registered charity [CC22230], which received $4,112,376 in government funding/contracts, and $342,029 in other grants/sponsorship in the financial year ending 30 June 2011, has “40-something staff throughout the country” according to one NZAF official. No figures have been provided as to how many of these are paid lobbyists. $2,564,846 was spent by NZAF on salaries/wages in 2010/2011. See www.charities.govt.nz ).

The Auditor-General would need to scrutinise the lobbying activities of registered charities like NZAF, if the latter’s paid staff were charged with unlawful lobbying, and refer offending paid charity workers to the police if they breached the new law. The Bill requires a report on any suspended or deregistered paid lobbyist to be reported to Parliament, as well as all investigations of such breaches to be undertaken.

Given that the Auditor-General is an MP, he or she will have to be very, very, careful in all dealings with undercover paid lobbyists, particularly when attending highly-visible social events, if the bill passes into law.

Reference: Lobbying Disclosure Bill. In the name of Green Party MP, Ms Holly Walker.

http://www.greens.org.nz/bills/lobbying-disclosure-bill

Note: The article”Registered charities and the proposed Lobbyists’ Code of Conduct and Register of Lobbyists” was first published on the SPCS Blog on 13 June 2012

Registered charities and the proposed Lobbyists’ Code of Conduct and Register of Lobbyists

by Leave a Comment

Under legislation proposed by Green MP Ms Ms Holly Walker, people who receive pay for lobbying MPs about laws or policies and who fail to register with the Attorney-General as paid lobbyists, could face criminal charges. The Lobbying Disclosure Bill, drawn from the parliamentary ballot on 21 April 2012, seeks to bring transparency to the activities of all paid lobbyists who attempt to sway and influence legislative processes by communicating with MPs. The bill proposes that the Auditor-General be empowered to investigate any alleged breaches of a Lobbyists’ Code of Conduct, which all paid lobbyists must agree to and sign, before they can lawfully engage in the lobbying of MPs. The Auditor-General will also be empowered to remove or suspend persons from a Register of Lobbyists if they breach the Code of Conduct.

Ms Walker wants regular statistics to be gathered on all paid lobbyists and the data regularly collated and reviewed, so the public, government officials and a host of enforcement agencies can closely scrutinise all their activities.

If her proposed bill, as drafted, passes into law, charities registered with the Charities Commission, such the the New Zealand Aids Foundation (NZAF), that are heavily engaged in political advocacy and lobbying AND receive significant government funding (see below); will need to have all and every one of their paid lobbyists sign a Lobbyists’ Code of [ethical] Conduct and register their personal details on the Register of Lobbyists.

Failure to do so prior to watching a rugby match from a NZAF-sponsored corporate box, or watching a NZAF-sponsored modelling pageant, alongside any MP or MPs, regardless of their gender, age, race, religion, political affiliation or sexuality; might lead to an unauthorised NZAF lobbyist having criminal charges being laid against him or her. Such unauthorised lobbyists attending a Big Gay Out event or a Hero Parade, who might be photographed or filmed arm-in-arm with an MP, whilst indulging in “political advocacy,” may face the prospect of being charged with criminal activity (lobbying).

Once charged, the NZAF charity worker accused would be required in make a credible defence to the Attorney-General, disclosing the range of presumably “gay” friendly legislative issues discussed with the friendly MP, and the methods used in the lobbying campaign, if any.

Authorised NZAF lobbyists who face charges over alleged breaches of the Code  will have to rely on the official records made of their lobbying encounters as recorded by the friendly MPs as well as their own diary records and any corroborating evidence provided by Big Gay-Out/Hero Parade participants/witnesses.

(NZAF, a registered charity [CC22230], which received $4,112,376 in government funding/contracts, and $342,029 in other grants/sponsorship in the financial year ending 30 June 2011, has “40-something staff throughout the country” according to one NZAF official. No figures have been provided as to how many of these are paid lobbyists. $2,564,846 was spent by NZAF on salaries/wages in 2010/2011. See www.charities.govt.nz ).

The Auditor-General would need to scrutinise the lobbying activities of registered charities like NZAF, if the latter’s paid staff were charged with unlawful lobbying, and refer offending paid charity workers to the police if they breached the new law. The Bill requires a report on any suspended or deregistered paid lobbyist to be reported to Parliament, as well as all investigations of such breaches to be undertaken.

Given that the Auditor-General is an MP, he or she will have to be very, very, careful in all dealings with undercover paid lobbyists, particularly when attending highly-visible social events, if the bill passes into law.

Reference: Lobbying Disclosure Bill. In the name of Green Party MP, Ms Holly Walker.

http://www.greens.org.nz/bills/lobbying-disclosure-bill

Environmental Defence Society Inc. – a registered charity ‘enforcing’ the law

by Leave a Comment

The Environmental Defence Society Inc. [“EDS”] was registered as a charity with the Charities Commission on 18 May 2007 (Reg. No. CC10297).

Its Society’s Rules (amended on 6 May 2003) were first filed with the Charities Commission on 3 November 2011, and the “ojectives” were approved by the Charities Commission Registration Team as constituting  “charitable purposes” under the Charities Act 2005. The Rules are available on the Charities Commission website (www.charities.govt.nz)

Section 2 of the ESA Rules – The Objectives – include:

2. (a) “To exercise the Society’s rights under the Resource Management Act 1991 or under any other applicable laws currently in force in New Zealand including (but without limitation) the right to make submissions, lodge appeals (including appeals on a question of law), apply to become a heritage protection authority or apply for a water conservation order; give notice of its intention to appear and call evidence at proceedings, apply for judicial review, apply for declarations or enforcement orders, or exercise any rights or objection.”

The term “charitable purpose”, as it occurs in the Charities Act 2005, would appear to have  been interpreted in this case by the Charities Commission, as applicable to all the political-environmental advocacy activities engaged in by EDS ….

… including supporting enforcement agencies to uphold such [envoronmental] standards as set out in law and encourag[ing] constructive debate and discussion in this area.

S. 2(c) empowers the charity EDS to exercise rights under applicable law to lodge appeals at all levels of the NZ Judicial System (Law Court and Tribunals), act in the quasi-judicial role of an envornmental authority, and exercise rights or objections to decisions issued by government agencies.

It is somewhat puzzling that a charitable entity such as EDS which received $144,7123 in government grants in the financial ended 31 March 2011, excists to “exercise its rights” to take legal action over the actions or lack of action of government agencies and/or its officers, and engage in such litigation as a registered charity. However, the wisdom of the Charities Commission, to grant charity status to EDS, given the nature of its objective, is no doubt sound and well-grounded.

EDS arguably engages in a level of “political advocacy” when it seeks to have the law changed or upheld on environmental protection matters. Its officers, some of whom are “contracted consultants” working for EDS, would no dobt see themselves as engaged in the “charitable purpose” of “advocating for the New Zealand environment” when it came to involvement in costly litigation. EDS spent $59,058 in “litigation supprt” in the financial year ended 31 March 2010.

EDS funded six full-time and three part-time “contracted consultants” in 2010/11 at a cost of $364,731. Its total income of $555,191 included $144,736 obtained from government grants, and $114,500 from other grants and sponsorship. Its total expenditure was $583,180.