Charities Bill [HL]

My Lords, the Minister is as eloquent as ever. I wish to reply to the point made by the noble Lord, Lord Phillips. When I talk about systemic risk or threat to public confidence, I regard that as being posed by malfeasance on the part of a large national charity with which everyone is familiar and which receives substantial national publicity. I do not accept, and thoroughly deplore, malfeasance at any level on the part of any charity of whatever size. However, is one going to create a bureaucratic structure which will impose huge burdens on all charities and probably not catch anything much but just involve a lot of form filling and bureaucracy? I accept the point that my noble friend Lord Swinfen made; it was entirely fair. However, I would like that matter to comprise a part of the review in 12 months’ time. I would like the measure that we are discussing to be implemented now and for us to see how it fares. If my supposition is wrong and the noble Lord, Lord Phillips, is right and we introduce an asset test, my view is that after a year we will find that there have been absolutely no cases at all. However, that is just a guess. I wish to strike a blow for deregulation. I wish to test the opinion of the House. On Question, Whether the said amendment (No. 53) shall be agreed to? Their Lordships divided: Contents, 19; Not-Contents, 45 Clause 18 [Cy-près schemes]: