Charities Bill [HL]

moved Amendment No. 34:"Page 9, line 17, at end insert—" ““(   )   The Lord Chancellor may, after such consultations as he shall think fit, establish a suitors’ fund to widen access to the Tribunal by assisting with payments of applicants’ costs and may make rules for the purpose.”” The noble Lord said: My Lords, a comparable amendment tabled by the noble Lord, Lord Swinfen, is grouped with this amendment. I return to the issue of a suitors’ fund without any embarrassment or reluctance, because one of the great flaws of the Bill is to have no prospect of legal assistance for those seeking to take advantage of the charity tribunal. Our law is cluttered with tribunals that afford theoretical remedy to agreed citizens but are inaccessible because they are so expensive to access. I spoke to the noble and learned Lord, Lord Mackay of Clashfern, on this matter before he had to leave. He concurred in the number of such tribunals that suffered that crippling defect. As the National Council for Voluntary Organisations said in its briefing, the very evolution of charity law itself—and particularly the definition of what is charity—has been thwarted over decades because of the cost of getting proceedings before the High Court. As I have said before, it is very important to understand that the costs of going to the charity tribunal are not likely to be significantly less than going to the High Court when dealing with an issue such as charity status. Non-access to the legal remedies that the state provides is now commonplace across the board. I passionately believe that we need to introduce into the Bill at least the prospect of some assistance with applicants’ costs with respect to the tribunal. Amendment No. 34 is permissive in allowing the Lord Chancellor after consultation to establish a suitors’ fund,"““to widen access to the Tribunal by assisting with payments of applicants’ costs and . . . make rules for the purpose.””" I do not see how the Government can or should object to a permissive power. It will be in the hands of the Government and the Lord Chancellor whether or not they exercise it. I do not want to walk away from the Bill leaving it in a state where to get a suitors’ fund off the ground would require primary legislation. Since the need for the suitors’ fund will be quickly apparent, I urge this matter on the House tonight with all the strength I can muster. I beg to move.