ICR and it's refusal to accept donations

I’ve finally received a response from the Director of Fundraising at the ICR on their refusal to accept a £30,000 donation to their charity from a member of the shooting sports. This arrived soon after I requested details from the organisation on how I could go about using the Freedom of Information Act to gather information I felt was necessary to clarify the charities position:

Thank you for your enquiry. We are happy to confirm that The Institute's decision not to accept the Spider's Appeal donation was based on solely on our concern that publicity could give rise to an enhanced risk to the security of our staff and The Institute. We wish to state definitively that The Institute has no position on shooting.

With regard to your supplementary questions, any decision of this type is based purely on the perceived risk to The Institute or its staff.

I have replied asking if they had received any specific threat and am contemplating where to go with this. My thoughts are along the lines that if they have received information on a specific threat then all is well and good. If there was no specific threat and the decision was based upon their perception of the current climate of fear over criminal animal rights thugs then their refusal to accept donations should logically extend to every industry that is in some way detrimental to animal wellfare (eg food industry).

I am also inclined to draw the conclusion that their declaration that they have no position on shooting is not compatible with their statement. To maintain the foundation of their refusal they must surely continue to refuse donations from shooting sportsmen and women for exactly the same reasons they site in the response above.

I am not yet satisfied with their response on this matter. I would like to know why they would not continue, if they have refused this particular donation, to refuse donations from shooters.

Posted by John at May 27, 2005 11:04 AM | TrackBack