Influence of NGOs must be curtailed

If, like me, you have heard of the now ubiquitous 'NGO' but are unsure of what the acronym comprises, this article will hopefully help. My curiosity is piqued because NGOs are at once maligned and lauded. Depending on their agenda, it seems they can be advocates for the greater good and positive change or, as so often cited, agents who, by sleight of hand and well-financed influence, are undermining the very pillars of our democracy.

As civic organisations are meant to serve the public interest, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) should play a valuable role in society. Their mission is to advocate for various causes, provide services, and influence policy - all ostensibly for the greater good.

However, in recent decades, critics have argued that some NGOs have amassed disproportionate power and now exert undue influence over government policy. The issue raises questions about democratic legitimacy and accountability.

On the one hand, NGOs can enrich democratic discourse by representing marginalised groups, providing expertise, and bringing new perspectives. Their advocacy keeps governments attuned to emerging issues and the interests of citizens.

However, many NGOs today are massive, well-funded entities with global reach, and Ireland is no exception. Amnesty International has over 10 million members worldwide. Greenpeace has over three million supporters and high-powered lobbying arms. The Gates Foundation has a $50 billion endowment.

Such NGOs command resources and political capital that rival nation-states. Their power does not derive from the ballot box or any democratic mandate. Yet, they are increasingly shaping government agendas and laws.

This trend is alarmingly evident in Ireland, as NGOs like the Irish Council for Civil Liberties were instrumental in lobbying for the recent passage of hate speech legislation. They argued this was necessary to protect vulnerable minorities, and I have written extensively on the dangers of such a narrow definition. Their influence demonstrates the NGO's role in shaping lawmaking despite opposition from a legion of elected officials and citizens.

Other groups like the Irish Council for Civil Liberties, the Immigrant Council of Ireland, and the Transgender Equality Network Ireland have similar clout and argue that existing legislation is inadequate to protect minority groups.

Many Irish observers accuse NGOs of circumventing public consultations to ram through ideological legislation. In the case of the Hate Speech legislation, soon again before the Seanad, detractors allege it was the product of unchecked NGO influence rather than democratic consensus.

More worrying, however, is the reality that many leading Irish NGOs receive substantial funding from foreign philanthropic foundations and donors. For example, the Open Society Foundation, Atlantic Philanthropies, and Sigrid Rausing Trust are significant funders of groups like the Irish Council for Civil Liberties. Such outside, non-national bodies are shaping Irish policy through financial endowments.

In 2020, Amnesty International Ireland received over €4 million from foreign sources out of a total income of €5.2 million. The Immigrant Council of Ireland obtained €800,000 out of €1.6 million from outside Ireland.

The practice is profoundly undemocratic at its core, as such extensive foreign funding allows NGOs to outspend their grassroots activist counterparts vastly. It gives them disproportionate resources to campaign aggressively for their legislative agendas. The practice needs urgent review.

Permitting foreign interests to bankroll domestic advocacy undermines Irish sovereignty. The budgets and priorities of Irish NGOs should reflect local civic society, not the agendas of international billionaires and foundations. But we are voices crying in a political wilderness, as many NGOs work hand in hand with Irish political interests. There are growing calls for the Irish Government to mandate more transparency and oversight around NGO funding sources and lobbying. NGOs may play a constructive role in policymaking but must be accountable to domestic constituencies. Once again, our hard-won democratic freedoms are undermined at the highest political echelons.

The present hate speech legislation demonstrates the capacity of NGOs to shape Irish law with potentially excessive haste. As their influence grows, balancing activism with democratic checks is crucial for our civil society.

The Government should consider steps like capping foreign funding for NGOs focused on domestic policy issues. While NGOs play a vital role in policy debates, appropriate checks are needed as their influence expands. The hate speech law, though ostensibly drafted for egalitarian reasons, demonstrated the NGO's capacity to drive legislation rapidly amidst opposition, subverting the necessary checks and balances.

Ireland must strike a nuanced balance between facilitating activism and upholding democratic norms. NGOs can productively stir citizen participation by highlighting social issues rather than replacing legislators as policymakers. At its core, an NGO has an advisory role and should enrich rather than erode Irish democracy.

Ireland is not alone in needing to define and keep in check this burgeoning sector. But there have been successful and laudable results internationally, and these should provide the template for the Irish model before the corruption of excess funding compromises the practice irretrievably.

Some examples of NGO success merit mention. The International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN) was instrumental in bringing about the UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in 2017, despite opposition from nuclear powers. ICAN won the Nobel Peace Prize that year, highlighting the influence of NGO activism over state-level diplomacy. The key to success is maintaining a stance of political neutrality.

The International Criminal Court, founded in 2002, allows NGOs to provide evidence and lobby judges. While promoting justice, it also dilutes state sovereignty by granting unelected actors sway over the international legal system.

The Gates Foundation funds the vaccine programmes of governments across the developing world. While saving lives, this concentrates immense power over public health policy in a private foundation. It is also profoundly compromised by business interests and financial gain.

Such examples demonstrate how NGOs can override elected officials today, shaping policies that can be anti-democratic. Their authority derives not from elections but from moral prestige, often embracing 'wokeness' and leveraging extraordinary financial resources.

There is a danger that NGOs are fulfilling vital roles that cash-strapped, gridlocked governments cannot. Governments have habitually failed citizens on issues like climate change, nuclear arms, and global poverty. NGOs are stepping into this leadership vacuum and shifting the power dynamic away from sovereign democratic practices. Ireland is no exception.

Irish government policy is already heavily influenced by special interests like corporations and lobbyists. NGO advocacy should provide a valuable counterbalance, focusing policy on social justice and sustainability. Their role is to enhance democracy by speaking truth to power, not twist policies towards an ideological bias.

At this juncture, NGOs are still dwarfed by national budgets and policy apparatus. But that could swiftly change, so their power needs strict limitations. Credible NGOs tend to have robust internal governance structures, but they need reminding that such authority stems from public trust in their brands and mission.

It is obvious that appropriate checks and balances are vital, and our Government should consider stronger accountability and oversight. It would be prudent to set limits; NGOs above a specific budget/influence must have democratically elected boards and leadership. To maintain democratic integrity, capping foreign funding sources is vital for NGOs focused on domestic policy issues. With such vast sums of money funneled into the Irish NGO system, it is necessary to mandate transparency around NGO funding and lobbying activities. And again, to embed our democratic principles into the sector by giving elected legislatures and citizens a 'supervisory' role in vetting and approving NGOs before they get access to domestic policy-making processes.

The lines between civic mobilisation and coercion, expertise and elitism, activism and democracy need clear definitions; otherwise, corruption can run rife.

Getting this balance right is vital for Ireland's governance. The legitimacy of our democracy depends upon it.