Definition of a " Charity " ?

Getting government acceptance as a charity delivers a huge list of benefits to any organisation seeking donations of money from the public.    Just for a start, people donating are entitled to claim that donation as a tax deduction, and the charity is given other tax breaks that includes exemption from paying income tax.

The number of organisations with " charity status "is awesome and stretches across the entire spectrum of medical research.  Then there are the groups that deliver services to the underprivileged, run op shops, deliver meals and run soup kitchens - the list seems endless and few would query their charity status.

The Federal Treasurer, Wayne Swan has queried whether Greenpeace fits that description.

What has drawn the Treasurer's attention is a Greenpeace plan to try and raise $ 6 million by way of public donations to fund court challenges to the expansion of coal industries, and the necessary rail and port structures that go with export of that mineral.   Greenpeace opposes the mining, export and even the use of coal on global  warming grounds - and yet this action is in direct opposition to this country's economic plans.

There seems to be a fine line between an organisation that merely enhances a point of view to draw support, and one that breaks the law by employing activism to destroy infrastructure under the banner that " the end justifies the means ".    Many will remember that it was Greenpeace opposition to genetically modified (GM) crops that saw a break-in to a trial scientific experiment.   This illegal destruction of government property falls within the definition of " urban terrorism ".

It seems that Greenpeace considers itself outside the laws of this - or any other country.   It gives support to activism against Japan's whaling expeditions in the southern ocean, and it was involved in entering French exclusion zones when they were testing nuclear weapons in the Pacific ocean.   Many will support opposition to both whaling and nuclear testing, but the moment we condone actions outside of the law we cross a line used by those who use suicide bombing and acts of terrorism to further their beliefs.

The question seems to be if there should be a dividing line between activism of an illegal nature when charity status is first bestowed - and whether that status should be reviewed and renewed on a regular basis.?

And that invites a further division to be examined.    Does the collection of tax break money from the public for the purpose of a court challenge to the government's plans to finance the running of this country fall within the definition of " charitable " activity ?

At the moment, the definition of a " charity " is not clearly defined !