My Lords, is the noble Earl sure that he wants to listen to that explanation at this time of day? In any event, let us deal with Amendment No. 87. I am grateful to the Minister for what he has said, but I am also not grateful because, with respect, he did not address the argument. The point about these new merger provisions is that they do two things by the operation of law: first, to see the cessation of charities that merge; and, secondly, the automatic vesting of all their assets in the new charity. In my view, it is a nonsense to declare that this is comparable with any existing arrangements; it is not. It is also grotesquely unfair to the poor old creditor who may know nothing whatever about the merger business. Indeed, if it is not on the register of notification, he would not know in any case. He will suddenly wake up to find no charity to go up against and no assets anyhow. On that basis, I feel that I ought to test the opinion of the House.
On Question, Whether the said amendment (No. 87) shall be agreed to?
Their Lordships divided: Contents, 128; Not-Contents, 152
Charities Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Phillips of Sudbury
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 18 October 2005.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Charities Bill [HL].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
674 c716 Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 14:11:57 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_267657
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_267657
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_267657