Legion Scotland's rebrand; data protection expertise in charities; the regulator's new board member

Comments from readers on the Third Sector website

The Royal British Legion Scotland has rebranded to become Legion Scotland
The Royal British Legion Scotland has rebranded to become Legion Scotland

Legion Scotland sparks a rebranding dispute

The Royal British Legion Scotland's decision to rebrand as Legion Scotland has been met with complaints from hundreds of people, including veterans, many of whom see the name change as a move to appease Scottish nationalists.

The charity - which has retained Royal British Legion Scotland as its legal name - said it had temporarily disabled the comments function on its Facebook page after there was a stream of "negative and abusive" comments on the social networking site.

People expressed frustration that the decision was taken without consultation with supporters, and during the same year as the Scottish referendum vote. Many called it an insult to the men and women who gave their lives in wars.

On ThirdSector.co.uk, Colingilchrist commented: "Creating a brand from a name that the members refer to on a day-to-day basis has absolute logic behind it. It brings the organisation up to date, to be better identified by recent veterans, to stand quite clearly on its own as a separate entity and therefore raise much-needed cash for Scottish veterans around the world."

Patricklt: "The Royal British Legion is also often referred to as 'The Legion', but I've not yet heard any argument that it needs to drop the 'British' and the 'Royal' from its title. Whether this is politically motivated or not, one thing is sadly clear: this is not a brilliant example of good communications nor timing. All this has served to do is stir up a hornet's nest, inevitable by its close timing to the Scottish referendum, which diverts unnecessarily from the excellent and essential work that the charity undertakes."

EU data protection laws a 'headache' for charities

New EU data protection laws could be a "real headache" for UK charities if implemented in their current form, an intellectual property lawyer has warned.

Mike Gardner, head of intellectual property at the law firm Wedlake Bell, said he was telling charity clients they should prepare for the laws before they come into force, which is expected to happen between March and September next year. Gardner cited the proposed obligation for any organisation with more than 250 employees to appoint a data protection officer as an example of how difficult the changes could be for charities.

Lynn Wyeth commented: "There's an army of experienced and qualified data protection officers out there if you bother to look. Companies do not need more qualified lawyers, who, in my experience, rarely specialise in data protection at all."

Rowenna Fielding: "In most cases, it is not the lack of specialist lawyers that is a barrier to good practice; it is the need to change working culture and appropriate allocation of resources."

Mike Ashley appointed to board of the regulator

The Charity Commission has appointed Mike Ashley, a non-executive director at Barclays and member of HM Treasury's audit committee, as a board member and chair of its audit and risk committee.

He will serve for three years. He succeeds Nazo Moosa, who stepped down in September. Ashley was formerly the head of quality and risk management for the accountancy firm KPMG.

Colin Nee said: "Unable to find anyone with a passing interest in the charity sector?"

Nick P: "I think that a lack of experience in charities is now a requirement for appointment to the commission."

What's your view? Click 'comment' under thirdsector.co.uk stories and join the debate

Have you registered with us yet?

Register now to enjoy more articles and free email bulletins

Register
Already registered?
Sign in

Before commenting please read our rules for commenting on articles.

If you see a comment you find offensive, you can flag it as inappropriate. In the top right-hand corner of an individual comment, you will see 'flag as inappropriate'. Clicking this prompts us to review the comment. For further information see our rules for commenting on articles.

comments powered by Disqus