Examination of Witnesses (Questions 220
- 227)
WEDNESDAY 16 JUNE 2004
MR CHRISTOPHER
SPENCE, MR
DAVID EMERSON
AND MS
RHONA HOWARTH
Q220 Lord Campbell-Savours: When
you say "being done", you mean that is in the Bill?
Ms Howarth: In the Bill. I cannot
remember which Clause it is.
Q221 Lord Campbell-Savours: It is
Clause 29.
Mr Spence: I am thinking about
where a trustee has acted honestly and in the best interests of
the charity, to have the power for the Commission to recognise
that is important, but it does not mean that there could not be
a legal case against those trustees.
Lord Campbell-Savours: I wonder if I
might be able to ask Lord Phillips a question on this very matter.
Whilst the Charity Commission can relieve persons, surely a civil
action could still be brought.
Lord Phillips of Sudbury: Correct.
Q222 Lord Campbell-Savours: Are you
satisfied, if that is the case, with the law in this particular
section?
Ms Howarth: I am not a lawyer,
but I would assume that there could be a civil action even if
the Commission relieved it.
Mr Foulkes: I think that may be something
we should pursue with lawyers rather than with you, Rhona, on
another occasion.
Lord Campbell-Savours: I do think this
is an extremely important area. It has been raised with us by
a number on that side of the Committee.
Q223 Lord Phillips of Sudbury: Can
I just clarify it? The answer to the question you were asking
is that section 29 only entitles the Commission to relieve a trustee
in respect of a breach of trust, where the trustees might sue
a trustee for a breach of trust or somebody on behalf of the charity
might sue the trustees for a breach of trust. It does not go to
the issue of the third party supplier to the charity who is owed
money by the charity.
Mr Spence: Perhaps I could make
one point on the personal liability of trustees in answer to Lord
Best's question. I have never known that issue to be the cause
of not getting a trustee onto a board, but I think the issue does
come more into focus now because it is part of the audit process
that organisations should undertake risk assessment and that is
where it naturally falls. I think boards are more conscious of
it and look at it as part of a risk map.
Q224 Ms Keeble: I want to come back
to this point about people who work for organisations being a
trustee. One of the principles of good governance in any organisation
is that by and large the people who work for it should also be
involved in the decision-making, that is quite an important factor.
The St Andrew's Group, which has a hospital in Northamptonshire,
have a huge number of staff and it would seem to me to be totally
in line with good governance that there should be staff representation
on the board of trustees. I would be astonished if you said that
people who work for an organisation should not be on the board
of trustees. I just wanted to ask whether or not you think that
where you have got thousands of people employed in what is basically
a public service they should not be involved in the decision-making?
Mr Spence: I have been both a
trustee and chair of a board and chief executive and I am very,
very clear that what works is a separation of the roles, but that
does not mean that as an officer of the organisation I am not
highly influential in setting the policy.
Q225 Ms Keeble: If you are going
to be highly influential it ought to be transparent and everybody
ought to know how it works and therefore you should be on the
board of trustees. If you have got a self-selecting group of trustees,
which is what you have described, there are issues about accountability
and pressure from the wider community. It would be like having
the NHS without any trade union representation anywhere at the
top.
Mr Spence: I think the executive
and the board work together to do this, but it does not help it
along for there to be confusion between the two.
Q226 Ms Keeble: If you are a councillor
you have a statutory right to so many days off to do public service
but that does not extend to people who have any role in charities.
I just wonder if you think that the volunteering should be recognised
by time off work in a properly constructed way?
Mr Spence: Yes. We are really
promoting the idea that employers should have employee volunteering
policies which should include enabling employees to engage in
governance.
Mr Foulkes: There is just one other aspect
that we want to tackle and that is the question of donations to
charity. Christopher, you mentioned the great and the good. There
is no one greater and better to lead on that for us than Lord
Sainsbury.
Lord Sainsbury of Preston: I think a
lot of the points that could have come up under this heading have
already been covered and I personally do not really have any questions
in view of the time.
Q227 Mr Foulkes: Anyone else? Can
I thank you very much indeed for what has been some very helpful
evidence. We are really grateful to you for the time you have
taken, for coming along and for expressing your views and, even
more so, for agreeing to give us some further written evidence
in response to a number of questions from members of the Committee.
We are very grateful to all three of you. Thank you very much
indeed.
Mr Emerson: May I clarify by which
date you need the written submission?
Mr Foulkes: The Committee has a very
tight timetable. Our Clerk will get in touch with you about that.
I am sorry it is tight, but we have to have deadlines to work
to.
| 
