The Charity Commission's flawed review into City of Sanctuary UK
It launched a compliance case into the charity
“Regulator finds no evidence that refugee charity engaged in inappropriate activity”, read a press release by the Charity Commission for England and Wales yesterday, after it closed its compliance case into City of Sanctuary UK.
The Commission looked into “concerns… over the charity’s activities in schools, including the claim that school children were being encouraged to send Valentine’s Day cards to adult asylum seekers. This allegation had been circulating online and was also reported in the media.”
“Following a detailed review and a meeting with the charity’s trustees”, the Charity Commission said it “did not find evidence to support these allegations”, adding that City of Sanctuary UK had faced “a misinformation campaign, including threats to charity trustees and staff, in relation to the Valentine’s Day card allegations.”
I don’t know anything about these “threats”. But I dispute the idea that the charity “faced a misinformation campaign” - certainly not from me. I was first to write up the story, and my coverage was packed with screenshots and literature to evidence City of Sanctuary UK’s activities:
In my article above, for instance, I showed a screenshot of a Schools Activity Pack put together by City of Sanctuary UK (its Schools of Sanctuary Team and Together with Refugees). Here it is:
The screenshot makes clear that the charity:
encouraged schools to “Show your heart for refugees on Valentine’s Day”
described these as “cards” (“You can then display these cards at your school”; and
laid out a method that meant cards could be sent to “people seeking sanctuary” (by which the charity means asylum seekers/ refugees): “You can then display these cards at your school or send them to your local refugee organisation to share with people seeking sanctuary.”
However, the Charity Commission gives a rather abridged interpretation of events, claiming the cards were merely “heart-shaped general messages” that may go up for display in a charity’s premises:
“Heart-shaped general messages of welcome to refugees were displayed in schools, with some sent to a separate charity supporting refugees for display in its premises. The trustees explained that at no point did children write cards to individual adult asylum seekers or refugees.”
Despite the Charity Commission’s abridged account, Helen Earner, Director of Regulatory Services at the Charity Commission, said:
“concerns about the charity’s work were fuelled by online misinformation, something charities are increasingly subject to and a concern for us as regulator. While we can’t fact check every concern about every charity, sometimes the high profile of allegations means it is right for us to set the record straight where allegations cannot be substantiated.”
But where is this online misinformation?
It is certainly not in my coverage.
What’s worse is that the Charity Commission concludes there’s no issue with children making “Heart-shaped general messages of welcome to refugees”, which “did not amount to a breach of charities’ obligation to remain independent of party-political bias.” Will parents around the UK agree? That’s if they even know about the extent of City of Sanctuary UK’s Valentine efforts, including children making Valentine’s cards for their MP.
The Commission’s futile review helps to explain why the charity sector is in such a mess.
The Commission looked into “concerns… over the charity’s activities in schools, including the claim that school children were being encouraged to send Valentine’s Day cards to adult asylum seekers. This allegation had been circulating online and was also reported in the media.”
“Following a detailed review and a meeting with the charity’s trustees”, the Charity Commission said it “did not find evidence to support these allegations”, adding that City of Sanctuary UK had faced “a misinformation campaign, including threats to charity trustees and staff, in relation to the Valentine’s Day card allegations.”
I don’t know anything about these “threats”. But I dispute the idea that the charity “faced a misinformation campaign” - certainly not from me. I was first to write up the story, and my coverage was packed with screenshots and literature to evidence City of Sanctuary UK’s activities:
In my article above, for instance, I showed a screenshot of a Schools Activity Pack put together by City of Sanctuary UK (its Schools of Sanctuary Team and Together with Refugees). Here it is:
The screenshot makes clear that the charity:
encouraged schools to “Show your heart for refugees on Valentine’s Day”
described these as “cards” (“You can then display these cards at your school”; and
laid out a method that meant cards could be sent to “people seeking sanctuary” (by which the charity means asylum seekers/ refugees): “You can then display these cards at your school or send them to your local refugee organisation to share with people seeking sanctuary.”
However, the Charity Commission gives a rather abridged interpretation of events, claiming the cards were merely “heart-shaped general messages” that may go up for display in a charity’s premises:
“Heart-shaped general messages of welcome to refugees were displayed in schools, with some sent to a separate charity supporting refugees for display in its premises. The trustees explained that at no point did children write cards to individual adult asylum seekers or refugees.”
Despite the Charity Commission’s abridged account, Helen Earner, Director of Regulatory Services at the Charity Commission, said:
“concerns about the charity’s work were fuelled by online misinformation, something charities are increasingly subject to and a concern for us as regulator. While we can’t fact check every concern about every charity, sometimes the high profile of allegations means it is right for us to set the record straight where allegations cannot be substantiated.”
But where is this online misinformation?
It is certainly not in my coverage.
What’s worse is that the Charity Commission concludes there’s no issue with children making “Heart-shaped general messages of welcome to refugees”, which “did not amount to a breach of charities’ obligation to remain independent of party-political bias.” Will parents around the UK agree? That’s if they even know about the extent of City of Sanctuary UK’s Valentine efforts, including children making Valentine’s cards for their MP.
The Commission’s futile review helps to explain why the charity sector is in such a mess.
Well, who expected anything else from the Charity Commission? Who pays them? Oh, yes, us!!