My Lords, I am sympathetic to the noble Lord’s amendment; I can certainly see its merits. I am reluctant to go over the ground that we have trodden on this matter before. However, it is worth reiterating that we have created flexibility here. The threshold can be altered by a statutory instrument—primary legislation will not be necessary. However, we believe that any change to the threshold should be introduced after proper and full consideration. We need to consult properly. We arrived at this figure as a fruit of consultation. It is accepted by the sector. The sector would probably want to have its feelings listened to if a change were contemplated. As the noble Lord will have anticipated, that rather forces me back on my point about our commitment to there being a review of all thresholds in the Bill a year after Royal Assent. A year is not too long a period. It will enable consultation to be carried out and fair consideration to be given to the matter. The point about protecting capital sums is an interesting and important one. Clearly, that may well feature in the review.
As I say, I have sympathy for the proposition but under the circumstances, and given that we have the flexibility we need to deal with this matter in the future, I must continue to resist the amendment.
Charities Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Bassam of Brighton
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 12 October 2005.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Charities Bill [HL].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
674 c392 Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 14:00:44 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_265734
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_265734
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_265734