Supporting Documents
399. Throughout this report we have drawn on figures
contained in the Regulatory Impact Assessment (RIA) published
with the draft Bill. At several points we have called for fuller
figures to be included in the RIA with the real Bill. The RIA
contains no proper estimate of the benefits and risks involved
in the Bill. There are serious problems with the estimate of costs
and no estimate of the impact of regulation.
400. There are two other aspects of a draft Bill
which are normally considered in pre-legislative scrutiny: human
rights and delegated powers. The Joint Committee on Human Rights
normally reports on the ECHR implications of draft Bills and we
understand that it will do so shortly on this draft Bill. It has
not been possible within the tight timetable for that Committee
to publish a report in time for it to be taken into account by
us. We understand, however, that the Joint Committee on Human
Rights, as well as welcoming the addition of the promotion of
human rights to the list of charitable purposes intends to draw
the Department's attention to two issues relating to the advancement
of religion and the position of independent schools.[410]
No doubt these points will be taken into account in debate on
the real Bill.
401. The Lords' Committee on Delegated Powers and
Regulatory Reform considers the delegated powers in real Bills.
Like some previous Joint Committees we have obtained from the
Home Office a memorandum on the delegated powers in the draft
Bill.[411] This lists
some 18 order-making powers including:
a) rules on appeal and procedure for the new
Charity Appeal Tribunal
b) changes to the financial thresholds at which
excepted charities have to register
c) appointment of principal regulator for exempt
charities
d) detailed provision on charitable incorporated
organisations (CIOs)
e) reserve power to control fund-raising.
402. We expect that both Houses will want to debate
any statutory instruments brought forward on the five subjects
listed above. We defer to the Delegated Powers and Regulatory
Reform Committee on whether the parliamentary procedures (affirmative,
negative or none) applicable to the exercise of these powers are
appropriate, with one exception. We note that the reserve power
to control fund-raising - which would be used if self-regulation
fails - is subject only to the negative procedure. This would
not automatically require a debate, even in a standing committee
in the Commons. If self-regulation fails to such an extent that
the reserve power has to be invoked, we believe the seriousness
of the situation would merit debate in Parliament.
403. We recommend that the reserve power for the
regulation of fund-raising by charities in clause 36 of the draft
Bill should be subject to the affirmative procedure.
404. In this report we have concentrated on the substantial
policy issues raised in the evidence. That evidence also contains
a large number of detailed points about the Bill. To ensure these
are aired we have put together in a schedule all the points made
in written evidence received by the end of June and have asked
the Home Office to comment on them. This schedule is published
with the report on pages 115-116. We also draw attention to several
memoranda we have received also containing very detailed points
on the report which we expect the Home Office to take into account
when preparing the real Bill.
405. We have noted in paragraphs 100 and 249 the
lack of information in the explanatory notes on the consequences
of removing the presumptions of public benefit and the details
of the Charitable Incorporated Organisation.. We have called for
greater clarity in the explanatory notes accompanying the real
Bill.
406. One further barrier to understanding this draft
Bill has been mentioned in paragraphs 381-4 above in the context
of consolidating the charity law. We sought and obtained from
the Home Office a paper copy of how the legislation would appear
if the draft Bill was passed and the 1992 and 1993 Acts amended.
It was our intention to publish this on the Committee's website
to aid understanding of the Bill. Unfortunately - and to our surprise
- a publicly available electronic version of the previous and
proposed legislation could not be obtained. The Home Office was
only able to produce one from commercial sources and this could
not be published without the permission of the publisher. We understand
that while The Stationery Office does publish electronic versions
of past Acts, it does not maintain an up-to-date version including
changes made by subsequent legislation.
407. We recommend that when departments produce
draft Bills for pre-legislative scrutiny they should make available
an electronic version of how current legislation would be amended
if the draft Bill is enacted, either to the relevant parliamentary
committee or on the departmental website.
410 
