| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Lord Bassam of Brighton moved Amendment No. 96:
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Clause 56 [Appeals against decisions of the Commission]:
Lord Bassam of Brighton moved Amendment No. 97:
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Clause 57 [Applications for permits to conduct collections in public places]:
Lord Bassam of Brighton moved Amendment No. 98:
"(4) Where an application ("the certificate application") has been made in accordance with section 50 for a public collections certificate in respect of the collection and either—
(a) the certificate application has not been determined by the end of the period mentioned in subsection (2) above, or
(b) the certificate application has been determined by the issue of such a certificate but at a time when there is insufficient time remaining for the application mentioned in subsection (2) ("the permit application") to be made by the end of that period,
the permit application must be made as early as practicable before the day (or the first of the days) on which the collection is to take place."
The noble Lord said: My Lords, Clause 57 makes provision for applications to be made to the relevant local authority for a permit to collect in a public place. It requires such an application to be accompanied by a valid public collection certificate issued by the Charity Commission. The amendment simply makes provision for an application for a permit to be made as early as practicable after the prescribed period for such applications in circumstances where the applicant has not received a public collections certificate from the Charity Commission either within the prescribed period or in time to apply for a local authority permit within the prescribed period. I hope that noble Lords will agree that this small but perfect amendment improves the current provision. I beg to move.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Clause 58 [Determination of applications and issue of permits]:
Lord Bassam of Brighton moved Amendment No. 99:
The noble Lord said: My Lords, under the Bill at present there is no specified period within which a local authority must determine an application for a permit to collect in a public place. Our concern is to ensure that a decision is made sufficiently in advance of the date of the proposed collection as not to frustrate the planning and organisation of the collection. The amendment will achieve that. It is a simple amendment that will allow us to prescribe in regulations the period within which a local authority must determine such an application.
18 Oct 2005 : Column 721
The Bill already provides for application periods to be prescribed in regulations, as we have discussed in previous debates. Those regulations will be subject to full consultation, to ensure that the views of charities, local authorities and other interested stakeholders are properly taken into account. Our aim is for the resultant application periods, and now the period for determination of a permit, to be workable in practice. I beg to move.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Clause 73 [Amendments, repeals and transitional provisions]:
Lord Bassam of Brighton moved Amendment No. 100:
Page 73, line 31, leave out "contains repeals, including repeals of spent enactments" and insert "makes provision for the repeal and revocation of enactments (including enactments which are spent)"
The noble Lord said: My Lords, these are two consequential amendments recommended by the draftsman. Article 3(5) of the Regulatory Reform (National Health Service Charitable and Non-Charitable Trust Accounts and Audit) Order 2005 (S.I. 2005/1074) amends subsection (3) of Section 46 of the Charities Act 1993. However, the whole of that subsection is to be substituted by paragraph 133(3) of Schedule 8 to the Bill. So we think that Schedule 9 to the Bill should include a consequential revocation of Article 3(5), to be achieved by Amendment No. 109. As Schedule 9 does not yet contain any revocations, we need also to amend the inducing words, as achieved by Amendment No. 100. I beg to move.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Schedule 8 [Minor and consequential amendments]:
Lord Bassam of Brighton moved Amendment No. 101:
"(1) Section 39 (supplementary provisions relating to mortgaging) is amended as follows.
(2) In subsections (2)(a) and (4) for "the Commissioners" substitute "the Commission".
(3) After subsection (4) insert—
"(4A) Where subsection (3D) of section 38 above applies to any mortgage of land held by or in trust for a charity, the charity trustees shall certify in relation to any transaction falling within that subsection that they have obtained and considered such advice as is mentioned in that subsection.
(4B) Where subsection (4A) above has been complied with in relation to any transaction, then, in favour of a person who (whether under the mortgage or afterwards) has acquired or acquires an interest in the land for money or money's worth, it shall be conclusively presumed that the facts were as stated in the certificate.""
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Lord Hodgson of Astley Abbotts moved Amendment No. 102:
"( ) In subsection (2), at the end of paragraph (a) insert "but so that the requirements of such regulations shall be the minimum conmmensurate with the need to ensure that the statement of accounts provides a true and fair view of the charity's financial position".
18 Oct 2005 : Column 722
( ) In subsection (2), after paragraph (b) insert-
"(c) for more than one type of statement to be prepared to reflect the differing natures and sizes of different charities.""
The noble Lord said: My Lords, I move Amendment No. 102, to which is added the name of my noble friend Lord Sainsbury of Preston Candover. I need to make it clear that my noble friend has been instrumental in developing the amendment. He contributed extensively and knowledgeably to the pre-legislative scrutiny committee and has been most helpful on various points concerning charitable foundations to try to encourage others to follow his example as a generous donor and, indeed, trustee. I look forward to hearing his contribution to the debate in a moment.
It is an amendment to the numerous provisions in Schedule 7. It would make changes to Section 42 of the Charities Act 1993. That gives the Secretary of State power to make regulations prescribing the form and content of charity accounts. Section 42(1) refers to,
"a statement of accounts complying with such requirements as to its form and contents as may be prescribed by regulations made by the Secretary of State".
"for any such statement to be prepared in accordance with such methods and principles as are specified or referred to in the regulations".
It is one of the key principles of the Bill that charity regulations should be appropriate and proportionate. The Government accepted that argument during earlier debates. We recognise that a "one size fits all" approach to regulation is not in the best interests of the charity sector as a whole. However, at present all charities from the simplest grant makers to the giants of the charity world are obliged to prepare their accounts in accordance with the statement of recommended practice, commonly known as the SORP. The SORP is a long and complex document. The original charity SORP, issued in 1995, contained 240 paragraphs. The SORP in 2000 contained 358 paragraphs. The SORP in 2005 contains 439 paragraphs—nearly double the length of 10 years ago. That is in addition to compliance with the growing volume of regulations applicable to all UK organisations: employment, health and safety, discrimination and so forth. Surely that scale of accounting regulation is not applicable or worthwhile for all charities.
The Minister may argue that the Charity Commission will address the issue; one would hope so. However, the relevant paragraph of the annual report refers to,
"of Recommended Practice (SORP) for the preparation of charities' annual accounts and reports. Recognised by the Accounting Standards Board, the new SORP further hones charity reporting within existing principles. It aims to help charities explain what they do, how they go about it and what they achieve, merging narrative and financial reporting into a coherent, outcome-focused package, improving their transparency and accountability".
Leaving aside the ghastly collection of buzz words that disfigures that statement, I do not see much that leads me to believe that the new SORP will make sufficient distinction between large and small charities. We propose that the principle of appropriate and proportionate regulation should be extended to the preparation of charity accounts. That is why the amendment would give the Secretary of State powers to achieve just that. I hope that the Government will look with favour on it. I beg to move.
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |