They also promote research and raise awareness in the public mind on a range of issues (child prostitution, HPV vaccine, parental leave, child care etc). In the age of information overload, I think this could be argued as a charitable purpose. I think it possible to make a distinction between such forms of advocacy as opposed to a sole focus of lobbying government, and FF clearly advocate on family issues, and maybe that is a distinction requiring further assessment?

Even so, I’m mostly in your camp – if they aren’t deemed a charity, then so be it. Just make the rule consistent.

The ruling has to be applied fairly to other organizations too, and I don’t think it is (which may be limited resources as much as anything). This is not a great excuse, as it sets up charities to be targeted by activists (thus the FF questions back to the Board) and struck off because some small groups of people may be very vocal and very demanding. The irony then is that the so-called objectivity of the Charities Board is actually manipulated by political lobbying – which is not fine even if there’s no tax deduction.