Consumers, Estate Agents and Redress Bill [HL]

Not for the first time today, my amendments are grouped with those of the noble Lord, Lord O’Neill. I shall speak to AmendmentNo. 83 and oppose the Question that Clauses 20, 21 and 22 stand part of the Bill. This group of amendments contains both probing amendments and amendments which would make a valuable, substantive change to the functions of the National Consumer Council. I read Clauses 20, 21 and 22 with some trepidation. While the principle of each clause seems positive, a closer reading of their provisions gives rise to concern. Clause 20 gives the National Consumer Council the power to ““co-operate … and give assistance””, while Clause 21 allows it to undertake ““voluntary activities””. I cannot see why providing for the NCC to undertake voluntary activities should preclude it from co-operating and giving assistance. I would have thought that the one includes the other. In the light of the wide ranging provisions of Clause 21, will the Minister explain why it is necessary to include Clause 20? Perhaps his explanation will touch on the real purpose of Clause 21. It is entitled ““Voluntary activities””, yet the Explanatory Notes state: "““This clause is intended to enable the Council to undertake paid work or other work for other persons””." Clause 21 enables the NCC to, "““make such charges as it thinks fit in respect of anything done in exercise of its powers under this section””—" which is to say that the National Consumer Council can charge anybody for providing advice or assistance, research work undertaken—or, most interestingly to me, "““in the exploitation of commercial opportunities arising from the activities it carries on in the exercise of its functions””." The clause stand part amendments are probing. I would not wish to curtail the healthy engagement of the NCC in business or prevent it making useful alliances with private businesses. Where private investment can lessen the use of public funding or where industry can sustain the NCC's work, providing it with an invaluable insight into the needs and wishes of consumers, I should be glad to see that arrangement working effectively. However, the wording of Clause 21 is alarming. In the context of the Government's record to date on appointments made to the Big Lottery Fund, as my noble friend Lord De Mauley illustrated earlier, and the possibility of using NDPBs as a useful arm of government for publicity, I am concerned that Clause 21(3) will be too wide. Under it, the NCC will be permitted to spend, "““such sums as it considers reasonable in the exploitation of commercial opportunities'." While it is important that the National Consumer Council is able to retain independence and autonomy of management, subsection (3) seems to provide an opportunity for extensive spending on advertising. I am concerned that such a close alliance with both government and the commercial world could change the NCC's current, non-partisan perspective. I should therefore be grateful if the Minister were to put on record exactly what the two clauses are intended to achieve and how they will contribute to the NCC’s new status or maintain its current standards. Amendment No. 83 provides a more detailed suggestion of how the actions of the NCC under Clause 21 could be more accountable. It would ensure that where the NCC proposed to acquire an interest in an existing body corporate, the Secretary of State would have to give his or her approval. It is important to recognise the implications of transforming a once-independent body into one associated with the Government. I do not wish to curtail the independence of the NCC—I do not believe that this amendment would do that—but I wish to highlight the importance of ensuring that the functions of a body which is funded, even if in part, by the taxpayer and formally associated with the Government are transparent. Clause 22 stand part is a probing amendment to inquire how the NCC’s assets will be managed. The Explanatory Notes inform us that the properties of Postwatch and Energywatch will be able to be transferred to the NCC, and that the NCC will not be able to acquire new properties without the consent of the Secretary of State. Will the National Consumer Council have to petition the Secretary of State in order to change office buildings or expand and will the status of the new NCC’s assets be available as public information? Clause 22(1) states that the National Consumer Council, "““may do anything (other than borrow money) which is calculated to facilitate, or is incidental or conducive to, the exercise of any of its functions””." Will the Minister expand on what is meant by the NCC’s doing ““anything”” in the carrying out of its functions? I am grateful to Members of the Committee for their patience in the debate so far. I am sorry to have taken so long on this amendment. It is important to clarify these matters at this stage. I look forward to the Minister’s response and to how that will inform the amendments which I may bring back on Report.