The Sunday Times published a thorough article about Scotland's state-funded NGOs this weekend. I recommend reading the whole thing if you can, but the section on neo-temperance groups may be of special interest.
Chris Snowdon, head of lifestyle economics at the right-leaning think
tank the Institute of Economic Affairs, said Scotland was “in a league
of its own when it comes to funding its own pressure groups”. He
believes another flagship SNP policy — minimum unit pricing for alcohol —
is an example of the public debate being influenced by charities which
the SNP chose to fund well.
He cited Alcohol Focus Scotland, which last year received more than
85 per cent of its £792,000 annual income direct from the Scottish
government in the form of a “core grant”, and Scottish Health Action on
Alcohol Problems, entirely government funded. He said both groups acted
as “the Praetorian Guard of the SNP” when it came to minimum unit
pricing, a contentious policy introduced in Scotland in 2018.
After the policy was introduced, alcohol deaths in Scotland
increased, with some evidence emerging that it had forced those addicted
to drink to go without food.
A report by Public Health Scotland said there was “strong evidence”
it had reduced deaths compared with how many would have died had it not
been in place. However, it also acknowledged “negative health and social
consequences at an individual level” including driving up debt, reduced
spending or even alcoholics turning to “acquisitive crime”.
In 2024, after lobbying from charities heavily funded by the SNP, the
minimum price was increased, from 50p to 65p. The SNP cited charities
to back up its policy.
In February 2024, Sandesh Gulhane, a Scottish Tory GP, pointed out in
Holyrood that despite minimum pricing, alcohol deaths were at a 14-year
high, and only one out of 40 studies had claimed it led to a reduction
in deaths. In response, Shona Robison, then the deputy first minister,
quoted the chief executive of another charity, Scottish Families
Affected by Alcohol & Drugs, accusing the MSP of being “the only
person in the room who does not believe the evidence”.
It is another charity that the SNP has chosen to fund well because of
its ideological position. Last year, it received almost £1.9 million in
government, 17 times more than it received in donations. A decade
earlier, it received only £447,000 from the devolved administration.
Snowdon said: “It is creating a fake level of putatively public support
that wouldn’t exist, or at least wouldn’t have any amplification, if it
wasn’t for government money.”
Charities in England protected
A paper Snowdon wrote almost a decade and a half ago, “Sock Puppets:
How the government lobbies itself and why”, led to changes in England.
Under David Cameron, the government banned charities from using
government money to lobby the parliament or government, although they
remained free to do so using income from other sources. SNP ministers
rejected the idea, arguing that it would amount to “gagging” clauses
against charities.
Last year, the Labour government introduced what was known as the
civil society covenant, which explicitly states charities that criticise
government policies cannot be penalised “by excluding them from policy
discussions or funding opportunities”. Again, no such contract is in
place north of the border.
The article notes that charities in England and Wales get 24% of their income from the government but that this figure is 47% in Scotland.
In Scotland, there are claims that the SNP has in effect shut down
criticism from the charity and voluntary sectors because of a system
that leaves them umbilically tied to its political objectives and
fearing grave consequences if they step out of line.
There are never explicit threats — and never anything put in writing.
But according to numerous sources, a dependence on public funds has
meant scores of charities in Scotland have been co-opted into becoming
proxies for the SNP. Those with the same objectives as the SNP have been
given millions of pounds in funding, allowing it to use them as
advocates for its policies.
According to Alex Neil, who served in SNP governments under Sturgeon and
Alex Salmond, including as health secretary, the administration would
regularly ask “friendly” charities to support it publicly with
controversial policies. He said any link between funding and the
requests, often made by SNP special advisers, was always implied, but
that it was understood their dependence on the government meant they
would almost always fall into line.
Unsurprisingly, the Scottish government is very happy with this arrangement and has no plans to change it.
A Scottish government spokesman said: “We are improving the way we
provide funding to the third sector through our commitment to fairer
funding”, a reference to a policy intended to make the awarding of
grants more transparent and making them over several years.
He added: “The Scottish government agrees with the regulator’s
position that political campaigning, such as advocating for or against
changes in government policy or legislation is a legitimate way for some
charities to pursue their aims. Charities play a vital role in civil
society and it is right that they have the ability to advocate for
change that aligns with their charitable purposes.”
