Podcasts about charities act

On the Sunday Session with Francesca Rudkin Full Show Podcast for Sunday 23rd February 2025, filmmaker Miki Magasiva talks about how the death of his brother Pua drove the emotion of his incredible debut feature film Tina. Kiwi pop band Foley perform live in studio ahead of their album release this week. Francesca questions China's motive for the military ships practising live firing in the Tasman sea. While Professor of International Relations Stephen Hoadley shares his thoughts on the situation and what conversations Foreign Minister Winston Peters needs to have with his Chinese counterparts when he visits next week. Charity and tax lawyer Sue Barker hits out at the Charities Act saying it isn't fit for purpose and calls for more accountability. And the panel discuss whether you should be fined for wearing your togs down the main street. Get the Sunday Session with Francesca Rudkin Full Show Podcast every Sunday on iHeartRadio, or wherever you get your podcasts. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

There's been growing debate concerning the status - and tax exemptions - of charitable groups. Followers of Destiny Church stormed an Auckland library to protest a drag storytime event and disrupted a rainbow parade last weekend, prompting calls to evaluate their status. Many have suggested Destiny Church's charity status should be revoked, with Labour's Phil Twyford writing to the Charities Regulator to get them struck off. Charity lawyer Sue Barker says the current Charities Act is not fit for purpose. "The original Charities Bill that went through Parliament in 2004 was widely regarded to be fundamentally flawed - and it was almost completely rewritten at the select committee stage and rushed through under urgency without any proper consultation." LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A promised shakeup to the law governing charities is being criticised as a missed opportunity to make real changes and has instead delivered additional layers of complication. The Charities Amendment Act was passed in late June, with most of its provisions coming into force from early October. The history to the changes sought by the sector is long and complicated, and it was taken up by Labour in 2017 when it promised to review how the 2005 Charities Act was working. The government says the just-passed Charities Amendment Act will "modernise" the sector, cut red tape - particularly for smaller charities - and help them get on with their mahi. But those working with charities say that's not what it delivers - and instead of seizing the chance to boost charities' independence, it's helping to maintain a status quo where they're treated as little more than a delivery vehicle for government social services. Susie speaks to Andrew Barnes founder of trustee company Perpetual Guardian, which operates a Foundation and also owns the Givealittle crowdfunding site. She also speaks to Sue Barker, a lawyer who specialises in charities and public tax law and who has been following the progression of this legislation extremely closely.

In the latest episode of In on the Act, EG's Sarah Jackman catches up with Michael Ranson, barrister at Falcon Chambers, to discuss the Charities Act 2022. Due to come into force in three stages, the Act contains changes relating to the disposal of charity land, which are due to be implemented this spring. Ranson highlights the background to the changes, how they apply to property as well as detailing what's contained in each of the relevant sections.

In this session I have a discussion with Sue Barker about the proposed changes to the Charities Act in New Zealand, the submission process, the key issues at stake and the "paradigm shifts" of thinking that are also involved.  If you enjoy this check out some of the other content at www.theseeds.nz  We have also done a short article in plain English outlining some of the key changes here https://www.parryfield.com/the-charities-amendment-bill-key-changes/ and a guide to how to submit is here https://www.parryfield.com/the-charities-amendment-bill-making-a-submission/.  

A summary of changes affecting charities in England and Wales with Phil Frost.

A lawyer is describing new charity law reforms as an utter insult to the charitble sector. The community law and voluntary sector minister Priyanca Radhakrishnan announced changes to the Charities Act yesterday. Sue Barker completed a report on what world-leading charities law could look like for the New Zealand Law Foundation She believes yesterday's changes will further undermine the public's trust and confidence in charities. Barker spoke to Guyon Espiner.

Questions to Ministers Angie Warren-Clark to the Minister for Disability Issues: How is the Government delivering change for disabled people through Budget 2022? Chris Bishop to the Minister of Housing: Does she stand by her statements that "KiwiBuild is alive and well" and that "Since Labour took office at the end of 2017, it's been one of our government's top priorities to fix the housing crisis"? Dr Tracey McLellan to the Minister of Health: What recent announcements has he made about the Government's response to the independent review of Pharmac? Hon Gerry Brownlee to the Minister of Foreign Affairs: Does she stand by all her statements and actions with regard to New Zealand's relationships with Pacific Island countries, and China's moves to build a closer China-Pacific Island countries community? Shanan Halbert to the Minister for Economic and Regional Development: What announcements has he made on transforming the advanced manufacturing sector? Dr James McDowall to the Minister of Immigration: Does he agree with the Productivity Commission's finding that the immigration system "does not undergo the same level of transparency, public scrutiny and robust policy assessment that most other public policies require", and how can he be confident that his Government's immigration rebalance will alleviate workforce shortages? Arena Williams to the Associate Minister of Housing (Maori Housing): How is the Government partnering with iwi Maori to deliver new homes for whanau? Rino Tirikatene to the Associate Minister of Agriculture (Animal Welfare): How does Budget 2022 support Maori agribusiness and Whenua Maori Programme land users? Erica Stanford to the Minister of Immigration: Does he stand by his statement regarding why engineers are on the fast-tracked 'straight to residence' pathway that "those skills are at high demand"; and why are nurses not on that pathway, when Hon Andrew Little, Minister of Health, recently admitted that New Zealand hospitals are around 4,000 nurses short? Ricardo Menéndez March to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: Is she concerned some of our most vulnerable tamariki in benefit-receiving households are going to miss out on the $350 cost of living payment? Glen Bennett to the Minister for the Community and Voluntary Sector: What recent announcements has she made about proposed amendments to the Charities Act 2005?

The American Friends of Jamaica (AFJ) has been supporting charities in Jamaica for close to 40 years. Its areas of focus are education, healthcare and economic development.AFJ Executive Director Caron Chung says it is now time again for entities in Jamaica to apply for support through the organization that has issued grants in the region of US$16 million over the last 39 years.The deadline for applications is February 4, 2022 and charitable organizations in Jamaica must apply online at https://theafj.org/grants/ before the deadline. She notes that all the requirements are available on the website but they include registration with the Charities Act, updated financial accounts and an active board of directors. In this episode of Impacting Jamaica, Ms. Chung talks with host Keisha Hill about the work of the AFJ, its supporters and how the foundation is impacting lives across Jamaica. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this week’s episode, Emma Park speaks to Megan Manson about Operation Christmas Child, a programme that encourages schoolchildren and youth groups around the UK to send Christmas shoeboxes to children in developing countries. Those sending the shoeboxes may not be aware that they are being used as part of a conversion drive by an evangelical Christian charity, Samaritan’s Purse. The case raises the question of whether ‘the advancement of religion’ should still be a charitable purpose. Emma then speaks to Alastair Lichten about the NSS’s revelation that 20,000 children have been assigned to faith schools in the state sector this year despite their parents opting for a non-faith school as their first choice. The episode also features highlights from our 2019 Bradlaugh Lecture. Assistant head Andrew Moffat defended inclusive education in his talk ‘No Outsiders: Reclaiming Radical Ideas in Schools’. Watch this episode on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hIQHMg3_wsY&feature=youtu.be Transcripts: https://www.secularism.org.uk/transcripts Notes Does Operation Christmas Child benefit the public? https://www.secularism.org.uk/opinion/2019/09/operation-christmas-child-does-its-charity-benefit-the-public Samaritan’s Purse Mission Statement https://www.samaritans-purse.org.uk/who-we-are/ Charities Act 2011, section 3: List of charitable purposes http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2011/25/section/3 Complete videos of the NSS’s Bradlaugh Lectures https://www.secularism.org.uk/bradlaugh-lecture.html/ 20,000 children sent to faith schools against parental preferences in 2019 https://www.secularism.org.uk/news/2019/09/20000-children-sent-to-faith-schools-against-parental-preferences Make a stand for freedom, fairness and human rights by adding your voice to the call for a secular democracy. Join the National Secular Society today https://www.secularism.org.uk/join Support the podcast, share with a friend and leave a five star review everywhere you can.

About charitable purposes The Charities Act 2011 defines a charitable purpose, explicitly, as one that falls within 13 descriptions of purposes and is for the public benefit. Descriptions of purposes The list of ‘descriptions of purposes’ in the Charities Act 2011 describe broad areas of potentially charitable activity. Each item listed is a description or ‘head’ of charity rather than a fully-stated charitable purpose in itself. Under each of the descriptions lie a range of purposes, all of which fit the description, but each of which is a different purpose in its own right. The list of descriptions, taken as a whole with the purposes that underlie each description, encompasses everything that has, or may be, recognised as charitable in England and Wales. There is no automatic presumption that an organisation with a stated aim that falls within one of the descriptions of purposes is charitable. To be a ‘charitable purpose’ it must be for the public benefit. This has to be demonstrated in each case. In some cases, a charity may wish to adopt the wording of one of the descriptions of purposes as its stated aim. That may be acceptable where it is clear that what is being advanced is a charitable purpose for the public benefit. However, in many cases, the wording used in these broad descriptions of purposes can have more than one meaning, and not all of those meanings are purposes that the law has recognised as charitable. In some cases, the wording used may not make it sufficiently clear what the organisation has been set up to do. Where that is the case, further clarification may need to be added to ensure that the purpose that is to be advanced is one that is exclusively, and unambiguously, charitable. The commission will consider each case on its own merits.

Yes, this is a very long episode!  Have a listen to short intro to understand more but it is all the audio of more than 10 sessions at the two day conference "Future prospects for charity law, accounting and regulation" held 11-12 April 2019 at Te Papa and providing it all here so accessible to all those who were not in the room but would be challenged and empowered by the content.  I was on organising committee and all of those on it wanted to make the content readily available to others through this platform.  Check out other episodes of seeds podcast for close to 100 interviews with more good stories and challenges.  We had around 40 speakers including several from overseas and more than 10 sessions.  This was put on by CAANZ, CLAANZ and supported by Charities Services.  These are put in the order they appeared at the conference but you can skip to the right point by looking at this index: Session 1: Do charities need to be "regulated" 7:59 Keynote: How to prove public benefit by Jennifer Batrouney QC: 1:19:01 Session 2: Advocacy - Are Charities able to advocate against Government Policy? 1:44:45 Session 3: Accumulations or application - what to do about Charities' reserves? 2:32:23 Session 4: Future of Charities and Tax 3:07:55 Session 5: Governing charities 4:04:32 Session 6: Current Research in the Charitable Sector 4:48:51 Session 7: Review of the Charities Act - emerging issues and implications 5:36:16 Session 8: Social Enterprise - this is a separate seeds episode Session 9: Seeds podcast interview: A History of Financial Reporting - this is a separate seeds episode Session 10: Future of Financial Reporting 6:22:01 Group discussion 7:39:49 Final Keynote: Dr Oonagh Breen, Call to Action 8:29:20 End: 9:18:57  For more content visit www.theseeds.nz  For session 8 on social enterprise visit here. For Session 9 on History of Financial Reporting - an interview for seeds podcast visit here Videos and descriptions of speakers etc also up here    

A new report commissioned by Pro Bono Australia in partnership with the Human Rights Law Centre, has found that not for profits are on a path of quiet advocacy. The Civil Voices research showed that to a greater or lesser degree civil society organisations are engaging in various forms of “self silencing” – treading very carefully in their advocacy work, less they risk financial security and political retribution. In this episode of Not for Podcast: Where Not for Profits Fear to Tread, we unpack the report and look at the current state of not-for-profit advocacy in Australia, and how it compares to a decade ago. The latest research is framed against Australia Institute’s 2004 report, Silencing Dissent: Non-government organisations, which detailed the growing fears across the NGO sector concerning their right to advocate in the public policy domains, and more broadly about their changing role in the democratic process. A lot has happened in the 13 years since that report was published including changes to the political and regulatory landscape, the formation of the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission, the passing of the Charities Act and advances in the digital landscape. But Civil Voices shows us that Australian civil society still needs to be supported and encouraged to engage in frank and fearless advocacy. Pro Bono Australia is proud to have spearheaded the research and believes it sits firmly within the remit of our social impact mission to give a voice to civil society organisations. We know from a previous sector-wide survey conducted by Pro Bono Australia in 2015 that nine out of 10 not-for-profit respondents considered recognition of their advocacy role as the most important factor in developing the social sector. From our unique position as an umbrella to the sector we were able to take the temperature of civil society organisations on this important matter. In this podcast we speak to report author Sarah Maddison about what the report tells us about how charities are feeling at the moment; we talk to Community Council of Australia CEO David Crosbie about whether some of the sector’s fears are being realised; and we talk to the former president of the Human Rights Commission Gillian Triggs about the dangers of silencing the charity sector and what we can do to make sure organisations are not silenced. Download the transcript here. Featured in this episode: University of Melbourne Associate Professor Sarah Maddison Community Council of Australia CEO David Crosbie Former president of the Human Rights Commission Gillian Triggs   Produced by Wendy Williams and Luke Michael. Recorded in November 2017.  

Medium Charities are able to obtain a review instead of an audit and small charities are not obliged to have either. Nevertheless, many of those charities continue to obtain an audit, even though that is more onerous than a review and is required to be conducted by a Registered Company Auditor. Mel Yates at the ACNC discusses with CPA Australia whether charities should be encouraged to take advantage of this opportunity for red tape reduction and what impediments to the conduct of reviews need to be overcome.  Or does an alternative solution need to be explored? The ACNC was created in 2012 by the ACNC Act and has now been in operation nearly 5 years. Read the inaugural commissioner's, Susan Pascoe, reflection on those first 5 years in ACNC five years on: Reflections of the Inaugural Commissioner, Susan Pascoe AM in which she notes that, under the Charities Act, the ACNC Act is required to be reviewed after five years in operation. That review is expected to be announced in 2017 and stakeholder input sought.

A discussion with Assistant Commissioner Murray Baird about the origins of charity, what it takes to be a charity today, and the difference between charities and not-for-profits. acnc.gov.au Transcript Matt: Hello and welcome to Charity Chat – the ACNC’s podcast. In this episode, we’ll talk about the origins of charity, what it takes to be a charity today and the difference between a charity and a not-for-profit. My name is Matt Crichton and I’m from the Education team here at the ACNC and joining me today to talk about these issues is the Assistant Commissioner of the Australian Charities and Not-for-Profits Commission – Murray Baird. Hello Murray. Murray: Hello Matt. Matt: Murray, I think a lot of people would have an idea of the concept of charity and generally know what it means to be a charity in the community. Can you give us an overview of your idea of the concept of charity, its origins, and what it means to be a charity today? Murray: Yeah. Well it may come as a surprise to many in the community that the charity is much wider than we would normally expect. I think most people think of charities as organisations that help the community or assist people in need. But the idea of charity, go back about 400 years, is much wider than that. Originally, Queen Elizabeth I had to work out where people put money into charitable funds and whether it was being properly used. So she gave some ideas in an Act of Parliament as to what we meant by charity. And these were over time distilled into four categories. The first category was the popular meaning – that was caring for people in need who were ill or disadvantaged. Matt: Right, what most people would associate with charity? Murray: Yeah that’s right. But it does go further because the second category is advancement of education. So education is seen as good for the community and if it’s done on a not-for-profit basis, schools and universities also fall within the concept of charity. Matt: OK and I think that one is probably one that doesn’t quite fit the regular conception of charity for many people. It’s one that probably sits off to the side a little bit. Murray: Yeah, but I suppose if you think about it, a community is much better off if there is access to education and before the government was fully involved in education, clearly people who stepped up and offered it on a not-for-profit basis, were regarded as doing good works. Matt: Yeah, right. Murray: The third one is the idea of advancement of religion. So it was presumed that if you were involved in religion, you were giving people hope and security and moral improvements and that was good for the wider community. So advancement of religion came in and that covers all religious expressions. And then there was a grab bag of things that we thought were good for the community and we recognised all to be charitable. And over the years, the big ones that emerged there, were that the safety and security of the community; the progress of the community and encouragement of, interestingly enough, agriculture and business; we have protection of the environment, and arts and culture were said to be good for the community. So they were just put in a fourth category of other things beneficial to the community. Matt: Right, so there was recognition that there were plenty of other things that benefitted the community but just didn’t fit into those other three categories of charity that were available at the time? Murray: That’s exactly right, yep. Matt: And you mentioned that these categories came about over centuries, has there been any further sharpening of the concepts of charity or even a codification of these charitable purposes since? Murray: Yeah I think that’s a good way of looking at what happened in 2013 when the Australian government, for Commonwealth purposes, set out in the Charities Act, 12 charitable purposes. And the traditional ones are there under Advancing Health and Advancing Social and Public Welfare – there’s Advancing Education and there’s Advancing Religion. But what it does in setting out 12 charitable purposes is tease out that fourth category that I talked about earlier. And so we also find on that list Advancing Culture; Reconciliation; Mutual Respect; Tolerance; Human Rights; Safety and Security; Animal Welfare; the Environment and Advocacy for charitable purposes. And they even put a grab bag in called Other Purposes that are similar to those ones set out. Matt: Right, so even miscellaneous remains? Murray: Yeah, miscellaneous is still in there. Matt: OK and if we consider the charitable purpose or purposes as just one aspect of operations that an organisation must have if it’s to be considered a charity and registered with the ACNC as a charity, what are the other criteria that an organisation must meet? Murray: Yeah, there are three hoops you have to jump through. The first is you’ve got to be not-for-profit and that doesn’t mean you can’t make a profit – in fact we encourage charities to be sustainable - to have a bit of surplus at the end of the year. What it means is your purpose is not to give private profit to individuals. Matt: OK. Murray: You can pay staff – that’s reasonable. You can of course give benefits to the people who are the objects of your charity, but you can’t set out with a purpose of creating wealth for people. Matt: Right, so you can’t be distributing any surplus that the organisation may come across to any members or anything like that? Murray: No paying dividends. Matt: Of course not. And the third hoop, Murray? Murray: Yeah. When I mentioned three hoops – not-for-profit – it’s got to come within that list of 12 charitable purposes. And it also should be able to show public benefit. Public benefit can be looked at a number of ways. One, is it’s the opposite of private benefit – so it’s not there for individuals to gain wealth. Matt: Yep. Murray: But also, it has to show that there’s something good happening in the wider community, and it’s got to be more than just a small group or a family group. It’s got to be public benefit. So public benefit has got lots of flavour to it, but it really means that when we look at it, we say “Yeah, that’s good for the community.” And it’s also the opposite of detriment to the community. Matt: Of course. Murray: So if a charity has a track record of doing really bad stuff, we might say “Well, that’s not for the public benefit. That’s for the public detriment. We’re not going to allow it in.” They’re the three things. It’s got to be not-for-profit; got to have a charitable purpose; got to be for the public benefit. Matt: And are there any things that would strike a line through an organisation that wants to be registered as a charity? Are there any restrictions on what they can and can’t do? Murray: Yeah, there are a couple of things called “disqualifying purposes”. And those disqualifying purposes is to have a purpose of doing things that are illegal, and that makes sense. We don’t particularly want organisations to set up for illegality. And the other is not to cross the boundary into the political arena. Now, there’s a lot of debate about where that boundary is, but the Charities Act helps us by saying it’s the support or opposing of a political candidate or a political party. So that then makes you a political instrument instead of a charitable organisation. Matt: OK, right. Murray: That’s not to say you can’t be involved in the marketplace of ideas and express opinions as a charity on issues that will come up in the political process. But it’s when you actually say to people “Vote for this candidate. Vote for this party.” That’s what we’re on about. We’re on about the furtherance of this party or the opposition to that party, that really gets you into a different area. Matt: And how about an individual then? Could I register myself as a charity? Murray: You’ll recall that we talked of a public benefit – what we say is that an individual can’t be a charity. You have to at least have a group of people who come together for that charitable purpose. Matt: Right, OK. Murray: So we call it a “body of persons”. You could incorporate; become an association or a company – you don’t have to… as long as you’re an identifiable crowd and you could prove that you have a charitable purpose and you’re not-for-profit and for the public benefit, you can become a charity. Often, a constitution is the document in which you will express that purpose. Matt: Right, OK. And just touching on this concept of not-for-profit briefly, because we have talked about it in the context of how an organisation can become a charity, that I think there may be some confusion still in the public consciousness about the terms “charity” and “not-for-profit”. These terms don’t mean exactly the same thing but then again they’re not mutually exclusive, are they? Murray: I think if you think of one large circle of not-for-profit organisations – that will include sporting clubs which are not charitable; that will include membership and social clubs that are not for the public benefit generally. They’re for the benefit for the people who joined them. Matt: Right. Murray: It might be in a Bridge club – that’s not-for-profit but it’s not charitable. Matt: OK. Murray: So it is said that there’s probably about 600,000 not-for-profit organisations in Australia, but there’s only about 55,000 registered charities. So charities are simply a subset of not-for-profits. Matt: OK. Murray: So you can be not-for-profit and not a charity, but you can’t be a charity without being not-for-profit. Matt: OK, so we should think about charities as being – they’re not-for-profits that have a charitable purpose? Murray: Exactly and are for the public benefit. Matt: Yeah, of course. What about the organisations, and there would be a few out there in the community, that have a mixture of purposes? So they are not-for-profit; they do have a charitable purpose, but then they also have other purposes that aren’t considered charitable according to those 12 categories that we spoke about just before? Murray: Yep. We talk about having to have solely charitable purposes. Now, that needs a bit of unpacking because you can have purposes in support of your solely charitable purposes. So there can be other purposes, but they must be what we call “ancillary”. But if they’re an independent purpose, beside a charitable purpose and the other purpose is not charitable, that pollutes the idea of a charity. Matt: OK, so that would prevent them from being able to register as a charity, because a charity needs to have solely charitable purposes? Murray: Yeah, solely charitable but you can have some ancillary purposes or supportive purposes. Matt: OK, well that may be a useful way to think of the phrase “ancillary purposes” actually. They are the supportive purposes – the ones that are there to support the charitable purposes of the charity? Murray: Yeah that’s right. I think that if you had a charitable purpose and an independent non-charitable purpose, you might think of creating two separate organisations. Matt: OK. Murray: One which could register, and the other which could run in parallel as long as it wasn’t some form of device to be able to get around the system. But it would be possible to have cooperation between two organisations. Matt: Well that’s just about all we have time for. Thank you very much for your time today, Murray. I think you’ve done a great job explaining the concept of charity, where it’s come from and also where it sits today, particularly that point about the difference between a charity and a not-for-profit. Murray: It’s interesting that we’re called the Australian Charities and Not-for-Profits Commission. I think when we were first envisaged, we were starting with charities and perhaps we would move to not-for-profits as well, but there’s nothing on the horizon for that as far as I know at the moment. Matt: Yes, well maybe at some point, sometime down the line. Thanks again, Murray. We really appreciate you taking the time today to explain all things charity and not-for-profits to us. Murray: Thanks very much, Matt. Matt: Be sure to check out other episodes of ACNC Charity Chat and other resources including guides, facts sheets and webinars on our website at acnc.gov.au. And if you enjoyed this podcast and would like to hear more, subscribe on iTunes or wherever you happen to access it. Thanks for listening. We’ll see you next time.