- Oct 16, 2012
Charity trustees nominated by the Charities Regulator to sort out problems at the now defunct charity, Animal Heaven Animal Rescue (AHAR), have sharply criticised the Regulator after they ended up being sued over historic tax liabilities incurred by the Kerry-based charity.
Little and all as I know about charity governance, you would think that appointees put in by the state "Regulator" to sort out a troubled charity would have some kind of blanket exemption from trouble.
This is not about scant resources, just joined up thinking.
Or can anyone explain a point I missed?
We naively expected that we would receive the active support, advice and guidance of the CRA as we tried to sort out the many governance issues of AHAR, but this proved to be seriously lacking."
They also stated, "We are particularly aggrieved by the lack of support or communication from the CRA while being subject by Revenue to High Court proceedings."
In a statement to RTÉ the Charities Regulator said "there were limits to the kind of assistance that could be provided to the trustees due to the unforeseen nature of the complexities associated with the particular issues that arose within AHAR."
The Regulator, however, also said that it won't preclude nominating directors to wayward charities in the future, despite the legal predicament that Mr Hall and the other trustees have been landed in.
No of course it's not precluded, because the Regulator hasn't been fired immediately for this idiocy by whatever department is in charge of the CRA.
How do people like that get jobs in the public service in the first place?