K
KulrMeStoopid
Guest
http://www.clivebates.com/?p=1611
Are they liable in law or otherwise accountable if they press policies they know or should know do not work or actively cause harm? In this case, I refer to the health charities’ support for a ban on snus, in the face of all the evidence. The role of Cancer Research UK’s support for the ban on snus is especially troubling as it funds or otherwise influences so many other groups and academics. This gets to the heart of their charitable status, which under the Charities Act 2011 requires a them to have a charitable purpose that meets a test for a ‘public benefit requirement‘ (it is worth reading this – it applies equally to the stance they take on e-cigarettes). It turns out they are required to take account of evidence and can’t just make up positions that their staff feel comfortable with:
- a purpose must be beneficial – this must be in a way that is identifiable and capable of being proved by evidence where necessary and which is not based on personal views
- any detriment or harm that results from the purpose (to people, property or the environment) must not outweigh the benefit – this is also based on evidence and not on personal views
