Research and analysis

General Election 2024 casework summary

Published 14 August 2024

Applies to England and Wales

Background

The law is clear about the right of charities to campaign in support of their purposes provided they take a neutral stance on party politics. This is something that the Commission has made clear in its published guidance and continued to reiterate as the General Election approached.

In the months leading up to the General Election the Commission engaged widely with the charity sector to promote key messages from our guidance on campaigning and political activity. This included hosting a joint webinar with the Electoral Commission and speaking at a number of sector events focused on the General Election.

We published a dedicated General Election landing page (visited over 6,000 times), a document setting out lessons learned from previous election periods, a blog from our Chair reminding charities of their responsibilities and a joint blog with the Electoral Commission, whilst regularly reiterating key points from our guidance across our social media channels. We also produced a guide for candidates on the rules and wrote to political parties to share this. In a time of polarised opinions and angry disagreements, our messaging also consistently emphasised the Commission’s expectation that, in campaigning, charities would take the lead in engaging in discourse in a way which promoted respect for others, rather than aggression – thereby reflecting charities’ unique position in the eyes of society and the law. 

In the two years preceding the election, we had published a short, 5-minute guide to political activity and campaigning to make the core rules more accessible for a wide range of charities, and new social media guidance, which encompassed how charities use social media in their political activity and campaigning. We also updated our guidance focused specifically on the period once an election is called, signposting to new Electoral Commission rules.

We have taken this proactive approach in order to work supportively with charities to help them get it right, and we are pleased to note that the vast majority of charity campaigning during the election period ahead of the General Election appears to have taken on board our messaging and kept within the rules. This is evidenced by the lower levels of high-risk election related casework that the Commission has handled over this period when compared with previous election periods.

This shows how charities can speak up for the causes they serve, whilst following the law and Commission guidance on political activity and campaigning. We want to thank charities for engaging with our guidance so readily during this period.  

Alongside casework we were also able to offer ad hoc advice to charities when approached about specific issues, helping to address risks before they occurred.

The Commission uses the terms:

• ‘political activity’ to refer to activity by a charity which is aimed at securing, or opposing, any change in the law or in the policy or decisions of central government, local authorities or other public bodies, whether in this country or abroad
• ‘campaigning’ to refer to awareness-raising and efforts to educate or involve the public by mobilising their support on a particular issue, or to influence or change public attitudes

This report contains analysis of some of the key themes that we dealt with relating to campaigning and political activity by charities during the build up to General Election, being:

Overview of cases

Our enhanced monitoring of charities’ campaigning and political activities primarily covered the period from the General Election announcement on 22 May 2024 to polling day on 4 July 2024.

Overall, we opened 34 new compliance cases during this period, all but 1 of which we have concluded. These cases came from a variety of sources such as complaints to the Commission, reports of serious incidents raised by the charity itself, and cases that we proactively identified.

We assessed all of these cases in accordance with our published Regulatory and Risk Framework. Against this framework we assessed 14 cases as being of higher risk, resulting in our staff engaging with the trustees of the charities concerned to further understand, and address the issues. The remaining cases were either assessed as being of lower risk, resulting in general regulatory advice and guidance being sent to the trustees for them to take into account, or were assessed as not being a regulatory concern and therefore did not result in any further contact.

These 14 cases represent a significant, over 60%, decrease in the number of higher risk cases when compared to the 2019 General Election period, when we had dealt with 38 such cases.

Additionally, during this latest election period, we continued to focus on 12 more complex cases related to campaigning and political activity that existed prior to 22 May, the majority of which also remain ongoing at time of publication. For 2 of these cases further complaints were received during the pre-election period, and these were assessed as part of the existing cases.

We also responded to 35 charities who proactively contacted us via our customer service team, by phone call or email, to seek advice about the rules in relation to campaigning and political activity

The profile of charities that we engaged with was wide-ranging; there was no predominance of charities with a particular purpose. Most, but not all, have income of more than £1 million per year.

Our cases addressed concerns related to a range of major political parties across England and Wales.

Key themes

Charity leaders providing explicit support for a political party or candidates

Charities must not assist candidates with their election campaigns, financially or otherwise, or give any form of explicit partisan support. Doing so could be seen as calling on people - including their donors and beneficiaries - to vote for one party or another, which charities must not do.

We found some instances of charities or their trustees explicitly supporting particular candidates in the run up to the 2024 General Election, and we took regulatory action to ensure this was rectified quickly.

Wider UK or world events often intersect with how charities are involved in a General Election, and sometimes result in concerns and complaints. In 2019 that issue was Brexit. For this election period we saw a number of faith-based charities supporting candidates based on their stance on a single issue, the conflict in Israel and Gaza. Due to the complexity of the cases the majority of these cases are still ongoing.

Case study - Age Concern Wolverhampton (1051232)

On 4 June, our monitoring identified a news article detailing the Chair of Age Concern Wolverhampton (1051232) endorsing a political party and candidate by using her name and charity role in an online election leaflet.

We contacted the charity seeking assurances on how the matter was being handled, and clarification on whether the Chair was acting in a personal capacity, given the explicit mention of the charity’s name and the Chair’s role.

Age Concern Wolverhampton provided a response from the CEO the following day, outlining that the trustees had not endorsed the action, the Chair had resigned and a ‘cease and desist’ communication had been issued to the candidate to stop circulation of the leaflet.

Further correspondence was issued to Age Concern Wolverhampton, outlining our guidance on reporting serious incidents, asking it to keep us informed on notable updates in future.

Age Concern Wolverhampton is part of the Age UK network, a partnership of independent charities which are all separate legal entities. Age UK (1128267) also responded and acknowledged the inappropriate actions of the individual involved, emphasising that these actions had not been endorsed by Age Concern Wolverhampton.

Age UK confirmed it had previously sent advice about elections and campaigning to the CEOs of the Age UK network, and would additionally share our guidance on political activity and campaigning across the partnership of independent charities.

Visits to charities by prospective candidates

Charities are sometimes visited by prospective candidates as part of their election campaign. Charities may also invite candidates and political party representatives to public meetings about issues on which they are campaigning  in furtherance of their purposes, for example by inviting candidates to debate those issues.

These types of visits featured consistently in Commission casework during the run up to the 2024 General Election. These visits can be a way for candidates to interact with the local community and for charities to draw attention to their cause and express their aspirations for future changes to laws or policies. However, if not handled correctly, hosting such events can expose a charity to risk as it may suggest that the charity endorses a particular candidate by giving them a platform.

Trustees should be aware of these risks and take steps to preserve the charity’s party-political neutrality. Trustees should be able to justify why the visit or event took place, how it furthered the charity’s purposes, and how they ensured the visit did not result in any perceived endorsement for the candidate.

Case study - The Together Initiative (1193060)

The Big Help Out is a prominent national event held annually to raise awareness of volunteering across small and large organisations throughout the UK. This year, The Big Help Out was coordinated by The Together Initiative (1193060), a registered charity, with the objectives of showcasing the impact of volunteering.

The event ran from 7-9 June 2024 and at a relatively late stage in its planning, the Prime Minister called the General Election, resulting in the event falling within the period of political campaigning.

In this context, we were contacted by a senior charity leader who outlined that party political leaders would be invited to participate in the campaign, encouraging them to talk about their ambitions for communities and volunteering. It was hoped that these opportunities would be highlighted by broadcast media to showcase the leaders volunteering and supporting the event. In order to ensure those charities involved remained impartial and compliant with to charity law, mitigations had been put in place, such as ensuring leaders from all major parties were invited and would therefore be likely to be featured in any media coverage.  

We determined that reasonable steps were being taken to manage the risks, additionally noting that each individual charity hosting candidates at their premises or events would need to assess what was appropriate for their specific circumstances and implement any additional controls as needed.

The event was a success, with cross party-political support and 6.5 million people taking part, and we did not receive any concerns about campaigning or political activity linked to this event.

Case study - British Alevi Federation (1164879)

The Commission became aware of concerns regarding an event hosted by the British Alevi Federation (1164879), a registered charity, on 19 June 2024. During this event, which took place on 16 June 2024, a political party candidate was invited to speak. The concerns raised involved the candidate being given a political platform to criticise the Conservative Government and urge attendees to vote the party out in the General Election. A link to the recording of this was published on the charity’s Facebook page, and video evidence was provided to the Commission as part of the complaint.  

We contacted the trustees requesting further information, and reminding the charity of the Commission’s campaigning and political activity guidance. The charity provided a response the following day to confirm that it had removed the video from its social media platform. The trustees followed up with further information, stating that they were not aware a political speech was going to be made in the live stream and had not picked up on the content of the speech until we made contact with them. They noted that the individual was asked to attend the event in their personal capacity, however, the individual was introduced as a candidate before making their speech.

Given that the charity had provided assurances, had promptly removed the live broadcast, and that there did not seem to be a pattern of behaviour, the case was closed with further advice provided.

Charities’ use of social media in campaigning

Charities may use social media as part of their campaigning and political activity on issues that relate to their specific charitable purposes. Social media can be an effective way to reach current and prospective supporters, however the same rules apply online - charities cannot be party political and should take care to consider any risks of their social media campaigning activity that could negatively impact their charity’s reputation, which includes personal attacks or inflammatory rhetoric. The Commission expects charities to engage in public discourse in a way that promotes respect, tolerance and consideration for others.

All charities should take care to ensure they are aware of and follow our social media, campaigning, and political activity guidance

Case study - Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (207076)

Many charities are active in campaigning on social media and this activity intensified in the year that led up to the General Election.

Last year, we opened a regulatory compliance case into the RSPB after a six-part thread was posted on X (formerly Twitter) stating that named former ministers were ‘Liars’. Charities should not be afraid to use their voice passionately to campaign for causes they represent but they should always be acting in its best interests and must not be party political. It was important we took steps to ensure this did not happen again, particularly ahead of an election.

We found that the tone and nature of RSPB’s post was inappropriate and had not been signed off at the appropriate level within the charity. More could have been done to ensure internal policies and procedures were followed. However, in July 2024 we closed our case noting that the charity’s trustees had taken sufficient remedial action. This included the charity issuing an immediate public apology, carrying out an independent investigation and implementing changes to strengthen internal policies with use of Commission guidance.

We received no concerns about the RSPB during the General Election period.

Case study - The Trussell Trust (1110522)

In response to a comment given in an interview by Conservative Party Leader Rishi Sunak about not having Sky TV when he was growing up as a child, a satirical JustGiving page was set up on 11 June. The online fundraising page set out that the funds raised would be donated to The Trussell Trust (1110522), a registered charity, and included the charity’s logo. We contacted the charity to understand if it had endorsed this, due to potential concerns regarding its reputation and independence in relation to the page. The charity’s response confirmed it had no affiliation with the creation of the page, and felt it did not meet the threshold for reporting a serious incident. The charity outlined that reactive press lines had been prepared in anticipation of any further coverage.

On 14 and 15 June, the owner of the JustGiving page added commentary referring to other Conservative and Reform UK politicians. As the page retained the charity’s logo this therefore raised the level of risk to the charity’s reputation and independence. We contacted the charity again to seek further assurances and understand if it had considered the new content added to the JustGiving page, including in the context of the Commission’s guidance on political activity and accepting, refusing, and returning donations.    

The charity provided a detailed response, restating that it had no affiliation with the creation of the page. Its response also stated that while JustGiving could take down a fundraising page, the platform preferred this to be with the consent of the fundraiser. The Charity’s CEO contacted the fundraiser, and the page was taken down on 21 June 2024. The amount raised was approximately £12,000, with over 600 donations being made.

The trustees confirmed they supported the Executive Team’s decision not to return the donation(s), having taken account of the Commission’s guidance. The charity agreed the matter required reporting as a serious incident, which was received on 24 June. 

We were satisfied that the charity had provided appropriate assurances that its decision making was within the range of reasonable decisions it could take, and therefore closed the case.

Lessons for other charities’ campaigning

The campaigning cases conducted in the run up the General Election confirmed that charities have a valuable role to play in raising awareness of and encouraging debate about issues that affect their beneficiaries and wider society. As long as they follow electoral law, and charity law as set out in our guidance on campaigning and political activity, charities should feel confident to carry out such activity.

We are pleased to note that many charities sought to proactively engage with us when considering aspects of their campaigning and political activity. In these instances, we were able to offer high level advice and direct them to our relevant guidance, helping to steer charities in the right direction. And although during this Election campaign there were fewer cases that we assessed to be of higher risk than in 2019, the number of serious incident reports we received from charities was slightly higher. We take this as a positive sign that trustees are better aware of the importance of telling us when something has gone wrong and what steps they are taking to address the situation. It is right that we highlight both these aspects of good practice.

Whilst on the whole charities engaged in campaigning and political activity appropriately there were some issues that the Commission dealt with in this pre-election period where it was clear that the charity or a trustee or staff member had not understood or chose to disregard our guidance:

1. We dealt with several cases of charity trustees or senior leaders openly endorsing a political party in the party’s campaigning material without being clear they were acting in a personal capacity - see our guidance on campaigning and political activity for the rules on political neutrality.
2. We also dealt with cases of charity trustees and employees’ use of social media calling into question the political neutrality of the charity - see our social media guidance for more information the use of social media in charity campaigning.

The Commission recognises that in the run up to an election candidates and parties sometimes proactively engage with a charity without their prior agreement, for example referencing them in campaign material or making an unannounced visit. This can put a charity in a difficult situation and the Commission will continue to engage with political parties to remind them of the rules that charities must follow during a pre-election period.

In the pre-election period, the Commission found that on the whole charities that engaged with us about campaigning and political activity concerns in a productive and timely manner. Most charities responded quickly to our requests for information and the Commission received clear responses when additional information was required. This helped us to resolve issues promptly.

Many charities also proactively engaged with us on specific issues they were experiencing by contacting our Customer Services team, who were able to help resolve the issue or point the charity towards the relevant guidance.