Should charities campaign politically?

The debate in brief

Charities in England and Wales have a clear legal right to campaign on policy issues, provided the campaigning furthers their charitable purposes. The Charity Commission's guidance (CC9) is explicit: campaigning and political activity are legitimate activities for charities. Yet many charities hold back. The Transparency of Lobbying, Non-Party Campaigning and Trade Union Administration Act 2014 -- widely known as the "gagging law" -- imposes spending limits and registration requirements that have created what the sector consistently describes as a "chilling effect" on legitimate advocacy.

The tension is real. Charities working on homelessness, poverty, disability, or the environment inevitably confront policy failures. Staying silent on the political causes of the problems they exist to address can feel like treating symptoms while ignoring the disease. But critics argue that political campaigning risks public trust, diverts resources from frontline work, and -- where charities receive government funding -- creates a troubling circularity in which the state effectively lobbies itself.

Quick takeaways

The arguments

The case for campaigning: a duty, not a luxury

Charities sit at the intersection of human need and public policy. Homeless shelters see the consequences of housing policy. Food banks see the effects of benefit sanctions. Refugee organisations see what immigration enforcement looks like on the ground. The argument for campaigning is that this frontline knowledge is not just valuable but essential to democratic debate, and that failing to use it is a dereliction of duty.

The Charity Commission's own chair, Orlando Fraser KC, has been forthright on this point. He told the Guardian he would "robustly defend charities' right to campaign lawfully, even where such campaigning covers sensitive or politically divisive ground." In his October 2023 speech at the Charity Law Association Conference, he reiterated that charities are "free to campaign robustly in furtherance of their purposes" and that the Commission will not be "weaponised in polarised debates" by "parties intent on pursuing ideological aims" in politics or the media. The legal position is unambiguous: charities can campaign, and the regulator is behind them.

The strongest version of this argument goes further. If a charity exists to reduce child poverty, and government policy is increasing child poverty, silence is not neutrality -- it is complicity. More than 50 charities, including ActionAid, Christian Aid, Age UK, Amnesty International, Greenpeace, Women's Aid, and Sue Ryder, have publicly argued that the Lobbying Act prevents them from representing vulnerable people whose voices would otherwise go unheard.

The case for restraint: trust, mission, and the sockpuppet problem

The counterargument has several strands. The most substantive is about public trust. Charities are among the most trusted institutions in British public life, and that trust rests partly on a perception of independence from partisan politics. Once a charity is seen as politically aligned, its credibility as a voice for its beneficiaries may be diminished rather than enhanced.

The Institute of Economic Affairs' "Sock Puppets" report, authored by Christopher Snowdon, made a sharper critique: that many charities receive substantial government funding and then use it to lobby government for more funding and greater regulation, creating a closed loop of state-funded advocacy that "subverts democracy and debases the concept of charity." Snowdon noted that 27,000 charities were dependent on government for more than 75% of their income. Critics have called the report "less research than a muddled polemic," but the underlying question -- whether taxpayer-funded charities should lobby the taxpayer-funded state -- has genuine democratic weight.

There is also a practical argument. Campaigning absorbs resources. Smaller charities in particular may find that the legal complexity of the Lobbying Act, the cost of compliance advice, and the time spent on advocacy come directly at the expense of the service delivery their beneficiaries depend on.

The middle ground: campaign on your mission, not on everything

In practice, most sector leaders land somewhere between these poles. The CC9 guidance itself draws the line: political activity must further charitable purposes, cannot be a charity's sole or continuing activity, and must never support a political party. This is not a prohibition on political engagement -- it is a framework for disciplined engagement.

The risk is not that charities campaign, but that they campaign on issues beyond their expertise, or that campaigning becomes an institutional identity rather than a tool. The charities that campaign most effectively tend to be those that ground their advocacy in evidence drawn directly from their work -- using data, case studies, and beneficiary voices rather than partisan rhetoric.

The evidence

The Charity Commission's CC9 guidance, last updated in November 2022, sets out the legal framework. Charities can campaign to achieve their purposes. They can seek to influence government policy, support or oppose legislation, and engage in public debate. They cannot have a political purpose, support political parties, or allow individuals to use the charity as a vehicle for personal political views.

The Lobbying Act 2014 introduced a parallel regulatory layer. Charities spending more than GBP 20,000 in England (or GBP 10,000 in Scotland, Wales, or Northern Ireland) on activities that could be perceived as political during the 12-month regulated period before a general election must register as non-party campaigners with the Electoral Commission. In 2017, the Electoral Commission fined Friends of the Earth GBP 1,000 and Greenpeace GBP 30,000 for failing to register as non-party campaigners ahead of the 2015 general election -- activity that included, among other things, an anti-fracking poster campaign -- underscoring that even well-resourced organisations struggle with the regime's technical demands.

Lord Hodgson's independent review of the Act, published in March 2016, recommended around 30 changes, including reducing the regulated period from 12 months to four. The government rejected these recommendations, citing lack of parliamentary time.

The Charity Commission's casework report on the 2024 general election found a 60% decline in high-risk campaigning cases compared to 2019, with only 14 high-risk cases out of over 170,000 registered charities. The Commission attributed this to better guidance and more proactive advice-seeking by charities -- though the sector might equally read it as evidence of continued self-censorship.

The most counterintuitive finding in this debate is this: the law permits significantly more political activity than most charities exercise. The chilling effect is real, but it operates primarily through uncertainty and risk aversion rather than through actual legal prohibition.

Current context

During the original passage of the Lobbying Act, Labour under Ed Miliband committed to reforming the legislation, with Miliband describing it as a "gag on charities and campaigners." That commitment dates from 2014 and was not carried into Labour's 2024 general election manifesto. Reform has not materialised under the Starmer government, and the sector has been told it is unlikely in the current legislative session.

The Civil Society Covenant, launched on 17 July 2025, represents a broader attempt to reset the relationship between government and the voluntary sector. Built on principles of recognition, partnership, participation, and transparency, it was shaped by feedback from over 1,000 civil society organisations through an engagement exercise led by NCVO and ACEVO. Whether it leads to substantive change on campaigning rights remains to be seen.

Orlando Fraser KC's tenure as Charity Commission chair (2022-2025) was notable for his willingness to defend charities' right to campaign on contentious ground. His public rejection of the "war on woke" framing -- telling the Guardian he would "robustly defend charities' right to campaign lawfully" and dismissing complaints about charity "wokery" as outside the Commission's regulatory remit -- marked a shift in tone that was broadly welcomed across the sector. Fraser stepped down on 24 April 2025 at the end of his three-year term.

The political environment remains unsettled. Charities working on migration, climate, and inequality continue to face public and media hostility when they speak on policy, even when that speech is plainly within their charitable purposes.

Last updated: April 2026

What this means for charities

Charity leaders and trustees need to understand that campaigning is a right, not a concession. The CC9 guidance is clear, the regulator is supportive, and the legal framework -- while imperfect -- permits substantial political engagement provided it connects to charitable purposes.

The practical challenge is not legal but cultural. Many boards default to caution, particularly smaller charities without in-house legal advice. The Lobbying Act's spending thresholds and registration requirements, though relatively straightforward in principle, create enough uncertainty that risk-averse trustees pull back from activity that would be entirely lawful. This is the real cost of the current framework: not what it prohibits, but what it discourages.

Charities considering political campaigning should ground their advocacy in their own evidence, ensure trustees have formally considered and approved the approach, document how it furthers charitable purposes, and -- if operating near election periods -- seek guidance from the Electoral Commission or NCVO early. The charities that campaign well are those that treat it as a strategic decision, not an emotional reaction.

Common questions

Can a charity support a political party?

No. Charities in England and Wales cannot give money to, campaign for, or endorse a political party. The Charity Commission's CC9 guidance is explicit: a charity must never give support to a political party, and any political activity must further the charity's purposes, not a party's electoral prospects. A charity can, however, comment on party policies that relate to its charitable purposes.

Can charities campaign during elections?

Yes, but with restrictions. Charities can campaign on policy issues during election periods provided the activity furthers their charitable purposes. However, under the Lobbying Act 2014, charities spending more than £20,000 in England (or £10,000 in Scotland, Wales, or Northern Ireland) on "regulated activity" during the 12 months before a general election must register with the Electoral Commission. Regulated activity includes public rallies, printed material, and media advertising that could reasonably be seen as intended to influence voting.

What should trustees check before campaigning?

Trustees should satisfy themselves on three points. First, that the campaign connects directly to the charity's stated purposes. Second, that the activity is likely to be an effective use of charitable resources. Third, that it does not cross the line into supporting or opposing a political party. The Charity Commission's CC9 guidance provides detailed scenarios. For campaigns near elections, trustees should also check whether spending could trigger Lobbying Act registration requirements.

Does government funding stop a charity from campaigning?

Not legally, but it can create pressure. There is no rule preventing charities that receive government funding from campaigning on policy issues — including issues where they disagree with the government that funds them. The Charity Commission has been clear on this. However, critics argue that financial dependence on government contracts creates a chilling effect, with charities self-censoring to avoid jeopardising future funding. The IEA's "Sock Puppets" report made this argument explicitly; sector bodies counter that speaking up is part of a charity's duty, not a privilege to be traded for funding.

What is the difference between campaigning and political activity?

The Charity Commission draws a distinction. Campaigning means raising awareness of an issue to influence public opinion or behaviour — this is broadly permissible. Political activity means seeking to influence government policy, legislation, or political decisions — this is also permissible provided it furthers the charity's purposes, but requires more careful governance. The key test is always whether the activity is a reasonable way of advancing what the charity exists to do.

Key sources and further reading

• Speaking Out: Guidance on Campaigning and Political Activity by Charities (CC9) -- Charity Commission, updated November 2022. The definitive regulatory guidance on what charities can and cannot do politically.

• Third Party Election Campaigning: Getting the Balance Right -- Lord Hodgson of Astley Abbotts, March 2016. The independent review of Part 2 of the Lobbying Act, with around 30 recommendations the government declined to implement.

• Sock Puppets: How the Government Lobbies Itself and Why -- Christopher Snowdon, Institute of Economic Affairs, 2012. The most cited articulation of the case against government-funded charity advocacy.

• General Election 2024 Casework Summary -- Charity Commission, August 2024. Documents the 60% decline in high-risk cases and the Commission's assessment of charity campaigning during the election.

• A 'Chilling Effect'? The Transparency of Lobbying etc. Act 2014 and Charity Campaigns -- House of Commons Library. An accessible parliamentary briefing on how the Act has affected the sector.

• Orlando Fraser's Speech at Charity Law Association Conference 2023 -- GOV.UK. The then Charity Commission chair's defence of charities' right to campaign on contentious issues.

• Civil Society Covenant -- GOV.UK, July 2025. The framework for the Labour government's relationship with the voluntary sector, including principles on independence and participation.

• Political Campaigning as a Charity -- NCVO. Practical guidance for charities navigating the rules on political activity and the Lobbying Act.