League Against Cruel Sports censured again by Charity Commission for fox hunting lies

The Charity Commission has intervened and contacted the trustees of the League Against Cruel Sports (LACS) after a complaint that the animal rights charity had claimed on its website that "Hunting is not a form of wildlife management or fox control". This statement is in direct contradiction to the findings of the Government Inquiry into Hunting with Dogs, the Burns Report, which was published in 2001.

LACS has been warned by the Charity Commission for party political campaigning after both of the last two General Elections; it was censured by the Commission for a 2009 poll which described the Conservatives as the 'nasty party'; in 2011 it was warned again by the Commission after a vindictive campaign against businesses associated with hunts; and the Commission is currently investigating false information LACS gave in response to a previous complaint that the charity had paid the £12,000 legal costs of a former Chief Executive from charitable funds.

Tim Bonner, Chief Executive of the Countryside Alliance, said: "The anti-hunting campaign has always been based on lies and we are pleased to see the Charity Commission upholding a complaint against the League Against Cruel Sports and confirming the findings of the Government inquiry that hunting with hounds contributed to the management of the fox population in many areas prior to the Hunting Act. The case for banning hunting was, and remains, so weak that animal rights groups regularly resort to fiction to support their arguments.

"It is increasingly clear that it is impossible for LACS to maintain the arguments and activities of an animal rights organisation within the constraints of Charity Commission guidance. We still hope, however, that the intervention of the Charity Commission might persuade Trustees that it would be better to focus on evidence-based campaigns that would actually improve the welfare of animals, rather than prejudiced attacks on the rural community."

Ends..

Notes to Editor:

Excerpts of the Charity Commission's response as follows: "Having considered the points raised in your email, and taken further advice, we have decided to contact the charity regarding this matter.

"The day-to-day running of the charity remains the responsibility of trustees. However, we believe that the concerns you have raised need to be brought to the attention of the trustees of the charity.

"As you are aware, our job as regulator is to ensure that charities are accountable, well run and meet their legal obligations. Our work means that the public can be confident about giving their support to charities and beneficiaries can have confidence about the services they receive. Our regulatory work with charities is done by providing guidance and other best practice information, using our legal powers to make Schemes and Orders for charity administration in particular cases and intervening in matters where there is serious risk of significant harm to, or abuse of, charities, their beneficiaries or assets.

"The Commission will now take this matter up with the charity. Our discussions with the trustees will remain a matter for the Commission and the charity. We do not consider that it would be appropriate or proportionate to contact you further with the outcome of these discussions.

"Thank you for bringing your concerns to our attention."

Ends..