Mermaids, Gendered Intelligence & Fox killer launch appeal against Charity Commission over LGB Alliance charity status

*contemptuous

I don't really understand the argument that "funding" gives Mermaids standing in this particular claim. Mermaids has a particular cause, raising money to help trans people and their families and their belief in a gender-based identity, and the ensuing medical "needs" of that group. LGBA's cause relates to the welfare of LGB people, and their right to be attracted to, and engage in. sexual relationships with other people sharing the same biological sex, no medical needs involved. These are 2 very distinct causes.

People minded to donate to LGBA are not going to be donating to Mermaids for the same reasons they would otherwise donate to the LGBA, because they are not both covering the same causes. That is not to say the same people who would donate to LGBA (to protect same sex attraction) wouldn't also donate to Mermaids, but they would donate to Mermaids for a different reason (because they want to assist trans people and their families). It's not necessarily incompatible to support them both, but in supporting them both, you are not doing so for the same reasons.

Therefore, Mermaids claiming that both organisations are competing for the same funding necessarily must include the implied claim that members of the public are too stupid to know what they are donating their money for/to; and/or are incapable of making a considered decision, so one charity must go; and/or that people will chuck their money at anyone without really thinking about why. That's a pretty contemptible way to view your donors, and it's not something I would be shouting about if I was Mermaids.

for the benefit of the community and no one in the organisation can be paid more than the annual salary of a backbench UK MP

Sounds good doesn't it?

What it doesn't cover is the fact that many people who work under such self imposed "rules" are not restricted from earning additional income from other sources, sometimes on the back of the platform that role provides.

Speaking gigs, referrals, TV/SM events etc.

I find it quite amusing how many people fail to question how many people famous for their "high profile" charitable contributions to society live extraordinarily "comfortable"
lives...

Despite not being a charity itself, even the GLP isn't immune from the necessity of governance:

"Good Law Project is a private not for profit company limited by guarantee (Company Registration Number 10556197). You can read our constitution here. Our Code of Conduct is available here. Our assets and funding are used for the benefit of the community and no one in the organisation can be paid more than the annual salary of a backbench UK MP. We maintain a strategic risk register which is reviewed and updated at every board meeting." (Source: GLP website, my emphasis )

More crowdfunding?

So just musing here ... kimono lawyer must know this appeal is very likely a lost cause.

So what's in it for him? Or is he making bad judgement calls for reasons of stress, hanging out with the wrong crowd, losing his impartiality?

I think how this all plays out will be quite explosive and messy, given the nature of at least two of the appellants.

The one precedent that Barbara Rich found for a two-charity-spat taken to appeal would strongly suggest that this'll be thrown out on the 'Standing' issue.

I am delighted to see it's an actual judge who will decide, not Charity Commission people. The judge will read everything, I presume - and apply the actual law, not the law that Stonewall and Mermaids would prefer to have.

"Mermaids must also show that it is affected by the decision to register @ALLIANCELGB in order to have standing to appeal"

Thank you, that's really helpful. I've finally understood

@SpindleWhorl
Tribunals are part of the judicial system that often hear challenges to government/official body decision making eg immigration

These structure charts help show how they fit in
www.judiciary.uk/about-the-judiciary/the-justice-system/court-structure/

Charity decisions are covered by the First Tier General tribunal which why the case is there.

Lawyer Barbara Rich also has an interesting thread:

[on the] appeal of Mermaids, supported by other charities and the Good Law Project against the registration of alliancelgb as a charity by the Charity Commission in April 2021. The framework for an appeal against a registration decision is in the Charities Act 2011

twitter.com/BarbaraRich_law/status/1400013578858549250?s=20

Can I ask a very basic question please?

Who are Mermaids etc actually appealing to? That original article in the OP mentions 'court documents' and 'first tier tribunal'.

Which court is this?

Interesting thread on the rules around charities bringing legal action

That is interesting.

Mermaids talk about how their funding will be affected by lgba arriving on the ecene because they need to establish that they have standing to bring the appeal. The regulations mean that only people who are affected by the charity commission's decision to grant charitable status can appeal, so they need to show they are affected. It's not very convincing but there you go.

Stonewall is now so adrift from its stated charitable aims that even someone as dim as NK must have realised that starting a fight about another charity's charitable status would invite unwelcome scrutiny.

I wonder if certain people have actually understood this....

And if it underpins the withdrawal of a high-profile party to this case?

[quote MaudTheInvincible]Interesting thread on the rules around charities bringing legal action twitter.com/lecanardnoir/status/1400098835129643011?s=20[/quote]

Very interesting....

I wonder if certain people have actually understood this....

Interesting thread on the rules around charities bringing legal action twitter.com/lecanardnoir/status/1400098835129643011?s=20

Well this is interesting.

This has reminded me to get the virtual cheque book out and I have donated to sex matters and LGBA (who are actually really hard to find on google).

I never thought I would be thinking the daily mail had better reporting on an issue than the guardian. How things change.

Sunlight sunlight sunlight.

It's probably best that you hear it directly from the Charity Commission

Thanks for the screenshot, Yeahbutnaw. I don't like anyone (including the LGBA) insulting or denigrating anyone else on social media. Unfortunately, that seems to be everyday commerce on Twitter etc. I'm glad the LGBA had the grace to apologise and post more politely since then.It would be nice to see Stonewall etc cutting back on the abuse in return, but I'm not holding my breath.

But I still can't see where the LGBA are failing to do what they were set up for. I know it offends trans people that they are not included, but they have Stonewall and numerous other well-funded organisations of their own. Surely no one can begrudge LGB people the right to speak up for themselves?

I have been wondering how this thinking came about. If you look back to the civil rights movement, there were any number of different sorts of organisations, some of them disagreed with each other violently. On the other hand, BLM today seems to want to make a similar claim to SW, that their anti-racism is the only anti-racism.

American christian right promoting same sex attraction in the UK? They have just painted Christians as baddies without understanding either Christianity, Christianity in the UK, or for that matter the UK political right which sits to the left of the democrats.

Weren't Microsoft found to be in breach of the law because they were effectively a monopoly? It was probably US law and I'm too tired to Google it, sorry.

Christian right. 🙄 They just can't get it through their heads that ordinary women raise this money. They clearly think that we can't afford it.

Stonewall, Mermaids et al are clearly threatened by the very existence of LGB Alliance, why?

If there is no support from within the LGB arena for LGB Alliance, or what they are offering is unnecessary as it is already covered by existing charities then that will soon become apparent. The determination of others to shut it down because they will lose money or influence, because they can't control the narrative, because they can't enforce the one true belief and they are not interested in anyone holding any differing opinions from their own merely confirms that there is an absolute need for the LGB Alliance to support those who are not represented by the current charities and this action by Mermaids is drawing glaring attention to that fact.