3 ms·
It's poorly elucidated in the article: "The aim of the Cabinet Office edict was to stop NGOs from lobbying politicians and Whitehall departments using the gove
by retube 11y ago
It's poorly elucidated in the article:
"The aim of the Cabinet Office edict was to stop NGOs from lobbying politicians and Whitehall departments using the government’s own funds. "
The idea is to stop organisations, specifically charities, from using their government grants to lobby on political issues (i.e grants should fund only the charitable activities of the organisation).
Unfortunately it seems the law may not be specific enough in it's focus.
- balabaster 11y agoHardly surprising, where's the benefit in making a law so focused that it can't be perverted and used as a land grab for more power? "Just because the law is worded that way, doesn't mean we'll abuse our power"... because history hasn't shown us a hundred times already that that's exactly what they do - and by virtue of the fact they've done it so many times, you can only conclude that that's exactly what they intend, despite what they tell you. They use specific examples to get laws passed giving them control that encompasses far more than that which the law was "intended"... and I use the word "intended" to mean what they want you to think was intended. What is actually intended is exactly how the law is worded... if it weren't, it would not be worded that way. It doesn't matter what "the idea" is or what "the aim" of the Cabinet Office is, it matters how the law is written. In a court of law, they don't say "Oh, this is not what was intended by this law", they say "the law is black and white, written right here for all to see. You broke the law, here's your sentence."
- IanCal 11y agoJust to clarify here, there's no law. This is a clause being added to government grants about how the funds may be used.