Liverpool Law Review

, Volume 29, Issue 2, pp 143–163 | Cite as

Charities and Political Campaigning: The Impact of Risk-Based Regulation



This article examines the effects of the Charity Commission’s implementation of risk-based regulation on the political campaigning activities of charities. In doing so, it draws on the findings of a recent empirical study which explored charity representatives’ awareness of relevant law and regulation and their perceptions of the obstacles they faced in their campaigning work. The article begins with a brief exploration of the emergence of risk-based approaches to regulation, followed by consideration of the legal and regulatory requirements for risk management by charities. Moving to its main focus of political campaigning, the article notes the unique legal issues faced by charities in campaigning work. It provides a comparative evaluation of the 2004 and 2008 versions of Charity Commission guidance CC9 on campaigning and political activity by charities (CC9) in terms of their approach to legal compliance, their formulation of the specific risks of campaigning and their approach to the process of risk management itself. In addition, the article considers the relevance to campaigning activity of the Commission’s current plans for an ‘enhanced approach’ to risk in its compliance work. The article concludes by considering the potential impacts on charitable campaigning of both the Commission’s overall approach to campaigning and its perceived risks, and of further entrenchment of risk principles in charity regulation.


Charities Politics Campaigning Risk Regulation 


  1. Advisory Group on Campaigning and the Voluntary Sector. 2007. Report of Advisory Group on Campaigning and the Voluntary Sector. . Accessed 26 June 2008.
  2. Better Regulation Task Force. 2005a. Regulation–less is more. London: TSO.Google Scholar
  3. Better Regulation Task Force. 2005b. Better regulation for civil society. London: TSO.Google Scholar
  4. Cabinet Office. 1999. Modernizing government. London: TSO.Google Scholar
  5. Cabinet Office (Strategy Unit). 2002. Risk: Improving government’s capability to handle risk and uncertainty. London: TSO.Google Scholar
  6. Cabinet Office (Office of the Third Sector). 2006. ‘Better regulation for civil society’. The government’s response. London: TSO.Google Scholar
  7. Charity Commission. 2003. The Charity Commission and regulation. Accessed 26 June 2008.
  8. Charity Commission. 2004. Campaigning and political activities by charities. (2004 version no longer available via website).
  9. Charity Commission. 2005. Accounting and reporting by charities—Statement of Recommended Practice (SORP). Accessed 26 June 2008.
  10. Charity Commission. 2006. Simplification plan. Accessed 26 June 2008.
  11. Charity Commission. 2007. Simplification plan. Accessed 26 June 2008.
  12. Charity Commission. 2007b. Discussion paper on the Charity Commission’s risk and proportionality framework. Accessed 26 June 2008.
  13. Charity Commission. 2007c. Charities and risk management. Accessed 26 June 2008.
  14. Charity Commission. 2008. CC9: Speaking out—campaigning and political activity by charities. Accessed 26 June 2008.
  15. Charity Commission. 2008b. Campaigning and political activities by charities. Board Paper No. (08) OBM 03, 31 January 2008. Accessed 26 June 2008.
  16. Charity Commission. 2008c. Risk and proportionality framework for the commission’s compliance work. Board Paper No (08) OBM 13, 20 March 2008. Accessed 26 June 2008.
  17. Hilder, Paul, Julie Caulier-Grice and Kate Lalor. 2007. Contentious citizens. Civil society’s role in campaigning for social change. The Young Foundation/Carnegie UK Trust.Google Scholar
  18. Treasury, H.M. 2005. Reducing administrative burdens: Effective inspection and enforcement (The Hampton Review). London: TSO.Google Scholar
  19. HM Treasury/Cabinet Office. 2007. The future role of the third sector in economic and social regeneration: Final report (Cm 7189). London: TSO.Google Scholar
  20. Hutter, Bridget M. 2005. The attractions of risk-based regulation: Accounting for the emergence of risk ideas in regulation. (ESRC Centre for Analysis of Risk and Regulation). London: LSE.Google Scholar
  21. Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales. 1999. Internal control: Guidance for the directors of listed companies incorporated in the United Kingdom (The Turnbull Report). ICAEW.Google Scholar
  22. National Audit Office. 2000. Supporting innovation: Managing risk in government departments report by the Comptroller and Auditor General. House of Commons Papers, Session 1999–2000, 864. London: TSO.Google Scholar
  23. Seddon, Nick. 2007. Who cares? How state funding and political activism change charity. Civitas: Institute for the Study of Civil Society.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The Liverpool Law SchoolUniversity of LiverpoolLiverpoolUK

Personalised recommendations