Joe Saxton, co-founder of nfpSynergy
No, no, no, no, no is my answer to the question. It would be bonkers to make it compulsory for charities to join. First of all, there are tens of thousands of charities that do not fundraise, so why should they join? Second, even if every charity in the land joined the FRSB and stuck to the Institute of Fundraising's codes of practice, many people would continue to be wound up by fundraising. We need to focus on reducing the aggravation of fundraising, while continuing to raise money. Focusing on compulsory membership misses the issue. Let's start where the public are at, not where the sector's navels are.Brendon Elliott, head of international fundraising, The Brooke
We support the aims of the FRSB and any moves to achieve greater public confidence in our sector. Compulsory membership would most likely lead eventually to greater recognition that such a regulatory body exists, and a time deadline to achieve full membership would focus minds. But I don't believe we can move from optional to compulsory in a matter of months without causing problems for some organisations. It's also important that professional bodies agree a common stance, so I would argue for a longer time period.
Stephen Pidgeon, trustee, Institute of Fundraising, and chair of its standards committee
Compulsory FRSB membership by any charities raising money from the public would be good news, but it's unlikely to happen soon. The government claims to prefer self-regulation - which I applaud. In my view, however, compulsory membership would strengthen self-regulation.
We still face the threat from the Public Administration Select Committee breathing fire over face-to-face fundraising in particular. For some members, the solution would be to legislate to achieve control, but that would be a disaster.