Gary Johns maintains he is not seeking new enforcement powers following furore

This article is more than 2 years old

This article is more than 2 years old

The charities commissioner, Gary Johns, has defended his call for the regulator to have oversight of charities’ “effective use of resources”, claiming he is only seeking to educate the public about efficiencies in the sector.

Charities were up in arms at the proposal, labelling it a “bizarre overreach” and citing Johns’s track record of opposing charities’ spending on advocacy.

Johns has sought to allay the sector’s concerns, writing in his fortnightly column that he is not seeking new enforcement powers for the the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission (ACNC) despite the fact the ACNC submission had stated that it may need additional powers to meet the new purpose.

In its submission to a review of charities law, the ACNC called for two new objects: to promote “the effective use of the resources of not-for-profit entities” and to “enhance the accountability of not-for-profit entities to donors, beneficiaries and the public”.

Charities criticise 'bizarre' appointment of Gary Johns as head of regulator Read more

On Thursday, Johns said the proposed changes are “designed to encourage the responsible and accountable use of charitable resources” and are similar to the regulator’s powers in the United Kingdom.

“There has been a great deal of scrutiny recently about the effectiveness of charities and whether charities use their funds and resources to achieve the best results,” he said.

“These recommended objects are not designed to create restrictions or impose limitations on charities. They are not additional enforcement powers, but rather a mandate for the ACNC to support and promote effective and efficient use of resources.”

Johns said the ACNC “can play an important educative role for charities and the public on the importance of efficiencies ... and the opportunities available to organisations to increase their own efficiency”.

Johns said he wanted to “educate the public about the effectiveness and outcomes of our 55,000 registered charities”.

The Community Council for Australia chief executive, David Crosbie, said the regulator was already free to make recommendations about efficiency and didn’t need new objects “unless they intend to use them from an enforcement perspective”.

“It’s a confusing and opaque object. The only thing you can think is that ACNC is going to take a view on what an efficient and effective charity is,” Crosbie said. “We have previous statements from Gary Johns about what he thinks an effective charity is and it’s not one that advocates.”

Crosbie said the ACNC was not in a position to make generalisations about how much charities should budget for advocacy, salaries or IT.

“I don’t think the ACNC is in the best position to tell the RSPCA how to address animal cruelty – they already work on that all day every day.”

Australian charities 'self-censoring' political advocacy out of fear of retribution Read more

Crosbie said charities were accountable to their donors and governance structures and the communities they serve, and donations would dry up if they did not already provide information about how money was spent.

Charities were pleased to note that Johns also argued that the government’s proposed ban on foreign donations would “place a further regulatory burden on charities and may inhibit their ability to advocate as a method of achieving [their] charitable purpose”.

Acting chief executive of the Australian Council for International Development, Joanna Pradela, said the fact the regulator was speaking out about the bill “reflects the gravity of its implications”.

“The commissioner’s comments speak directly to the concerns raised by charities – this bill, as drafted, will inhibit charities’ ability to advocate,” Pradela said. “Silencing communities takes Australia down a dangerous path and erodes our shared belief in a fair go.”

Before his appointment as charities commissioner in December Johns was a Labor minister under Paul Keating and a former head of NGOWatch at the Institute for Public Affairs.

In 2014, Johns argued that the government should remove advocacy as a charitable purpose to “deny charity status to the enemies of progress”, citing charities that advocate against coal mining. In his 2014 book The Charity Ball, he said advocacy was of “doubtful public benefit”.