Charities Bill [HL]

My Lords, we on these Benches want to associate ourselves with the tribute paid by the Minister to Baroness Blatch. She was a devoted Christian and a doughty fighter and debater, whose fighting spirit showed through the latter stages of her illness. Her doughtiness led her at times to take on the Bench of Bishops and my friend the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Oxford said to me just after Prayers that he still carried some of the bruises. She will be sorely missed. Like previous speakers, I declare an interest both in a personal capacity as a trustee in various charities and an ex officio trustee by virtue of the office of Bishop. I believe that those are all in the register. On Second Reading I spoke from these Benches in general support of the previous Bill. I welcomed the changes that it would make to the framework for the regulation of charities and the provisions that would benefit charities by giving them greater freedom, subject to appropriate safeguards in pursuing their charitable purposes. The Bill in its reintroduced form deserves no less support. Indeed, there are some welcome changes, such as the new power for charity trustees to take out trustee indemnity insurance. That provision may help not only to prevent people being discouraged from acting as trustees of the smaller charities but to relieve the burden on the hard-pressed Charity Commission. The Bill has not been amended in relation to the abolition of the presumption of public benefit, which applies in some cases at present when charitable status is being determined. At Second Reading and in Committee on the previous Bill, we spent many slow but happy hours in the Moses Room, lacking only the provision of tea at tea time. I expressed many concerns about the implications of the abolition for the large number of charities associated with the churches and other faith groups, and went on to seek assurances that, if public benefit had to be demonstrated, the assessment of that benefit would be undertaken in a properly informed and constructive way. Since then, however, representatives of the churches have had the benefit of a constructive and helpful meeting with representatives of the Charity Commission, which has gone some way to reassuring us that the guidance on the public benefit requirement that the commission will have to produce will properly reflect not only the wide range of religious activity that is currently accepted as charitable, but the full breadth of the benefit to the public—both direct and indirect—that is derived from that activity. Following that encouraging start, we look forward, together with other faith communities, to working with the commission on the development of the statutory guidance. However, the removal of the presumption of public benefit is not the only way in which the Bill will have an impact on the churches and other faith groups. In many cases, the institutions through which they work enjoy charitable status. The Bill will change the nature of the relationship between some of those institutions and the Charity Commission. At one end of the spectrum the Church Commissioners will cease to have exempt charity status—a change that we acknowledge brings them into line with other charities. Initial concerns about the implications of the change for the continued ability of the commissioners to fulfil their important role of funding clergy pensions, which to people like me become increasingly important, and the ongoing support of the Church in areas of need and opportunity, have been allayed by assurances given by the Minister’s colleagues. We are grateful for those assurances and for the spirit of openness which Ministers have shown. However, the Church Commissioners are by no means the only body connected with the churches for which the Bill will bring about a major change in their relationship with the Charity Commission. The amendments to the position of excepted charities will mean that many denominational charities will, for the first time, have to register with the commission. They are often local bodies, including parochial church councils in the case of the Church of England and church and chapel trustees in other denominations. They are all basic building blocks of the churches at local level and, indeed, in many areas of the local community. That does not give undue rise for concern to those of us on these Benches. We recognise that even as excepted charities, such bodies have rightly had to meet the same requirements in many respects as registered charities. The real issue is not whether such bodies should be registered but whether they are registered or excepted, the regulatory burden to which they are subject is not in danger of becoming too great. The bodies that I have described are essentially community organisations. As such they are heavily reliant on the good will of volunteers and often do not have access to skilled, professional advice. As a result we hear increasing concerns that religious bodies are encountering difficulty in recruiting new office holders because of concerns about the responsibilities involved. For example, there is evidence that parochial church councils are finding it increasingly difficult to persuade people to act as treasurers, while the Church of England every year needs to recruit 13,000 plus treasurers and 26,000 plus church wardens to serve those local communities. I join the noble Lord, Lord   Phillips of Sudbury, in expressing my concern that the regulatory burden, particularly in relation to financial matters, should not be increased further. To do so would, in our view, run the risk of infringing the principle enshrined in one of the proposed new duties of the commission—that regulatory activities should be proportionate. The effect of the regulatory burden in the form that it will take if the Bill passes into law will need to be kept under careful review, lest excessive regulation stifle the voluntary impulse on which we rely in our nation, and on which so many of our smaller local charities depend. We therefore welcome the opportunity provided for that by the requirement for a formal review process, to be imposed in Part 4. Subject to that small but cautionary note, we welcome the changes that the Bill will make to the regulation of charities and, for our part, commend it to your Lordships’ House.