Civil Society Council: what it means for charities

In a readout published on 22 April 2026, the UK Government said the new Civil Society Council had held its first meeting at 10 Downing Street. The Prime Minister welcomed members, praised the work civil society does for people most in need, and said these organisations should be brought much more seriously into government decision-making. If you hear 'Civil Society Council' and think it sounds like Westminster shorthand, you are not alone. The important point is simpler: ministers are creating a regular space where charity and community voices are meant to be heard, not just thanked after the fact.

In everyday language, civil society means the organisations and networks that sit between the state and private business. That includes charities, community groups, volunteers, social enterprises and many of the local organisations people turn to when official systems feel distant or slow. That matters because these groups often know their areas in a way central government does not. When the Prime Minister spoke about stronger, more united communities and a sense of hope for the future, the message was that public policy works better when it listens to the people already doing this work in neighbourhoods, towns and cities.

The Prime Minister also linked the Council to the launch of the Covenant. The government readout does not set out the full text of the Covenant here, but it presents it as a new agreement about how government and civil society should work together. **What this means:** if the Covenant is taken seriously, it should be more than warm words about partnership. It should affect how ministers consult charities, how officials share responsibility, and whether smaller organisations are treated as real partners rather than being brought in late to approve decisions already made.

One of the most practical parts of the meeting came from Chris Ward MP, the Minister for Procurement. He said he wants procurement rules to work better for civil society and for the local services communities actually need, using a revised definition of social value. Procurement can sound dry, but it affects everyday life. It is the system government uses to buy services, from support programmes to community contracts. If social value is judged properly, a bid can be assessed not only on cost, but on whether it strengthens local jobs, trust, access and long-term community benefit. For charities, that could make the difference between being shut out and being able to compete fairly.

Ward also asked Council members where the problems still sit, and the readout says he agreed to work with them and with other civil society organisations on revising that definition. That is worth watching closely, because the wording of procurement rules often decides who gets a seat at the table and who is priced out. For smaller charities in particular, the details matter. A tendering process that is too complex, too expensive or too focused on scale can favour large providers even when a local organisation knows the community better. If government wants better outcomes, it has to stop treating size as the same thing as value.

The broader discussion moved beyond contracts. Members raised issues ranging from volunteering rates to the capacity of civil society, especially small charities, and they talked about what good partnership with government should actually look like. That is a useful shift. It is easy for ministers to praise volunteers in speeches; it is harder to deal with staff shortages, funding pressure and admin burdens that make community work harder to sustain. **What this means:** good partnership is not just about meetings in Downing Street. It is about time, money, trust and a willingness to remove the barriers that stop local groups doing their job.

Council chair Kate Lee ended the meeting by thanking members and saying the next stage would happen in smaller groups, supported by the No 10 team, before the Council meets again. That suggests the government wants working groups to turn broad promises into more detailed proposals. For you as a reader, there are three simple tests. Does the Covenant change how government behaves, or does it stay symbolic? Does the new social value definition help charities win public work where they are best placed to deliver it? And do small organisations see any real relief on capacity, not just recognition? Those are the questions that will tell us whether this first meeting was a starting point or just a carefully worded readout.