Localism Bill

My Lords, there is rather a lot here and I thank noble Lords who have taken part. Before I come to my notes, Clause 68(5) refers to voluntary and committee bodies and they can be defined. It might not be absolute but they can be defined in some way or another. When the subsection says, "““a body of persons or a trust which is established for charitable purposes””," it does not say there about the community. That can be national. It then says, ““a parish council””, which is clearly local, and, "““in relation to a relevant authority, two or more employees””," which might just be a partnership if it is two. If it is more, it can be any form of enterprise that was thought of. I am aware of the theology that exists in the different forms of co-operatives and so forth. There can be all sorts and then there is the catch-all in our friend, ““regulations””. Let us see how we can cope with the notes that have been made on specific amendments. Amendment 131A and 131C would require the voluntary and committee bodies to have some local connection, whether operating primarily in or for the benefit of the community in the relevant authority area, or working with a body that does. We are keen to encourage local and national bodies to work together to submit expressions of interest and bid for any subsequent procurement exercises, but many national organisations do excellent work locally in their own right—particularly for communities of interest, which may not always be well supported by a local group. We would not, for example, want to prevent the Alzheimer’s Society expressing an interest in running a relevant authority service. It is difficult to argue that it would not represent the interests of vulnerable, elderly people in a local area. These amendments could also prevent voluntary and community bodies that are successfully implementing innovations in service delivery from replicating their approach elsewhere. Amendments 131AA and 131B propose different requirements around a voluntary body’s surplus. Amendment 131B would require that surpluses should be used for the ““benefit of””, as opposed to being for the ““purposes of those activities””, "““or invested in the community””." Amendment 131AA would require that any surplus was, "““required to be and used””," as opposed to simply being ““used””, "““for the purposes of those activities or invested in the community””." Amendment 131ZB would enable the Secretary of State to add ““category of bodies”” as a relevant body rather than ““person or body””. I am not clear what material difference these amendments may make.