The Charities Commission got it right

The Charities Commission stripped Greenpeace of its charitable status in 2010. The reason given was that Greenpeace was determined to be a political advocacy group, rather than a charity. 

Since then there has been a protracted legal battle, with a visit to the Supreme Court in the wind after the High Court upheld the Charities Commission's decision, then the Court of Appeal found in Greenpeace's favour.

Unsurprisingly, the Greens went in to bat for Greenpeace, with Green MP Denise Roche reportedly preparing a Member's Bill defining advocacy as “charitable” if it is in pursuit of a charitable purpose. 

It's hard to see anything charitable in Greenpeace's latest political stunt; Stuff reports:

Greenpeace has launched an attack on Energy Minister Simon Bridges, proclaiming him as a liar on a massive billboard on one of the most prominent sites in central Wellington.
''Simon Bridges ... pants on fire,'' the multi-storey banner, measuring almost 300 square metres and stuck to the side of a Manners St building, reads.
Greenpeace, which has booked the high-profile site for about three weeks, says Bridges is accused of misleading Parliament over his dealings with the oil industry. It also says he wrongly claimed New Zealand can deal with a deep sea oil spill. 

If accusing a Minister of lying and misleading Parliament isn't political advocacy, we don't know what is. This is blatant politicking by Greenpeace, doubtless "encouraged" by their Green Party mates. The Greens of course are better known for defacing billboards than erecting them.

Simon Bridges however is flattered by the attention:

Following the billboard going up yesterday Bridges took to Twitter, saying: ''So chuffed to have my own billboard in Wellington Central today. Good photo too.''  

We're not quite sure whereabouts on Manners Street the billboard in question is hanging. But if it happens to be hanging within view of the Supreme Court, it should make the job of the judges deciding whether Greenpeace is too political to be a charity very easy indeed. 

It would seem that the Charities Commission made precisely the right decision in 2010, for precisely the right reasons.


Footnote: And perhaps one of our legal beagle readers might like to proffer an opinion on whether Greenpeace's billboard breaches electoral advertising legislation, given that there is no authorisation statement.