Charities Bill [HL]

My Lords, I remind the House that I was a member of the Joint Committee that scrutinised this Bill in draft last year. I also declare an interest as a trustee of a number of charities including the Almeida Theatre, the National Opera Studio, Southbank Sinfonia and Welsh National Opera and as a former employee of others including the Royal Shakespeare Company and the Royal National Theatre. If noble Lords detect a certain bias in this, they are certainly not wrong. Like other noble Lords who have spoken today I contributed to the Second Reading debate when an earlier version of this Bill was introduced, and I also tried—but I am afraid not as successfully as some colleagues—to stay in touch with the subsequent deliberations of the Grand Committee. However, I should like to pay tribute to the work done at that stage by my noble friends Lady Scotland and Lord Bassam, work which was rigorously but I think always courteously tested by the contributions of, in particular, the noble Lords, Lord Hodgson of Astley Abbotts and Lord Phillips of Sudbury. I am delighted to see that all four have their shoulders back to the same wheel now that we are setting the great work in motion again. I should like to say that as a result of their earlier efforts I agree with all those who have said that the Bill we have before us now is significantly improved, even from what was—as my noble friend Lady Pitkeathley observed earlier—a pretty good Bill to start with. So I think there is a great deal that we can feel very positive about. One of the benefits of being the tail-end Charlie, which falls to me today, before the more eminent contributions of the winders-up, is that if you have heard everything you want to hear said in the debate, you can afford to say very little more. I am sure that noble Lords will be grateful if I follow the intention of the noble Baroness, Lady Scotland, to provide pleasure and not irritation. If I cannot provide pleasure, I shall try to provide minimum irritation. I absolutely welcome the Bill which is needed. During the deliberations that have taken place on it in the past six months and, indeed, before that in the scrutiny committee, we have seen the huge support and great deal of good that it can bring to the sector which it is intended to regulate. I particularly welcome the introduction of a public benefit test and the expansion of charitable purposes which the Bill proposes. These issues have been extensively discussed by other Members of your Lordships’ House during the debate and I will simply say that I welcome them. It is, however, still the case that the effectiveness of these proposals, once they are enacted, will depend upon the ability of the Charity Commission to develop rigorous, transparent and fair systems for putting into practice the new powers that it will have. I draw particular attention once again, as other noble Lords have done, to the sensitivity of applying the public benefit test to charities that charge for their services—a group which is far more diverse than might be imagined from the controversy which inevitably surrounds the status of public schools and hospitals, and one which includes inter alia many of the most important cultural institutions, large and small, in the land. The noble Baroness, Lady Barker, and the noble Lord, Lord Dahrendorf—he is no longer in his place—referred to small charities. They referred to the possibility that small charities might also have as it were small publics. The importance of applying a public benefit test in a way which takes account of the fact that although a public may be small it is neither insignificant nor—I see the noble Lord, Lord Dahrendorf, has re-entered the Chamber—as the noble Lord, Lord Dahrendorf, put it, irrelevant, needs to be very carefully borne in mind. I would be very keen to hear from the Minister when he replies whether he is confident that the Charity Commission will be adequately resourced—I mean resourced in the broadest sense—to carry out its new duties so as to ensure that no inadvertent damage is done to a vitally important group of charitable enterprises. Finally, I return briefly to a point which, as the noble Lord, Lord Hodgson of Astley Abbotts, kindly noted, I and others raised at the earlier Second Reading and in Committee; that is, the question of the independence from government of the Charity Commission. Although the present Bill still states at Clause 6(1A)(3) that,"““The functions of the Commission shall be performed on behalf of the Crown””," I note with great satisfaction that a new subsection   (1A)(4) has appeared to the effect that,"““In the exercise of its functions the Commission shall not be subject to the direction or control of any Minister of the Crown or other government department””." Hoorah!—a listening Government, indeed. That is extremely welcome. The noble Lord, Lord Hodgson, raised a worry about the unchanged provision in Schedule 1 for the Charity Commission to secure departmental approval in its recruitment processes. I understand that worry so I hope we can be assured that that power will be exercised with a suitably light touch and that the commission will be encouraged and enabled to seek the best and most able people to fulfil its very difficult and extended remit and that there will be enough of them to do the job properly. That said, I welcome the Bill back. Like others, I hope that this time we shall see it reach the statute book speedily and that it will be unimpeded by anything other than the usual vigorous debate.