Clause 41
Charities Bill [Lords]
5:30 pm
Martin Horwood (Shadow Minister (Environment), Environment, Food & Rural Affairs; Cheltenham, Liberal Democrat)
Amendment No. 102 would amend proposed new section 74D(4)(b) of the 1993 Act. At present, the new subsection (4) provides that
“Any resolution of the charity trustees under subsection (2) must be approved by a further resolution which is passed at a general meeting of the body...by a decision taken without a vote and without any expression of dissent.”
That is an unusually high test of consent. A number of examples spring to mind when that might be difficult to achieve. A Quaker meeting is an obvious one. Another is when there has been debate and discussion, and dissent, but a consensus is reached with the resolution not being put to a vote. In that context, I shall not press the amendment to a Division, thereby illustrating that it is possible to have debate and dissent but to achieve a resolution that is perfectly satisfactory to all concerned. It seems like a sensible, almost drafting amendment that would remove a strangely strict test of consent from subsection (4)(b).
I should be interested to hear the Parliamentary Secretary’s response to many of the amendments tabled by the hon. Member for Isle of Wight. I am sympathetic to amendment No. 41 because the trustees of a charity have a drastic power. We are discussing a charity that holds no designated land. It is neither a company nor an incorporated body and its gross income in its past financial year was less than £10,000. In effect, therefore, the charity trustees may resolve to replace any or all of the purposes of the charity with other purposes. That is a drastic step and, even for a small charity, it is important for safeguards to be in place. Amendment No. 41 would provide a safeguard for the notification of members within the minimum period of 28 days. That is sensible and it would make a good improvement to the clause.
Amendment No. 125 would add the execution of the trusts to the modifiable powers of an unincorporated charity. I shall not pass judgment on that, but will await the Parliamentary Secretary’s remarks with interest. Amendment No. 42 also seems sensible. It would ensure that all members have been notified of the meeting at least 28 days in advance. It is consistent with the other amendments. I also support it.