Charities Bill [HL]

I am very much drawn to what the noble Lord, Lords Swinfen, had to say on this issue. The construction proposed by the noble Lord, Lord Wedderburn, might leave us in a less flexible situation and make it more difficult for the Charity Commission in certain circumstances. I am advised by the Charity Commission, which is entirely happy for me to place this on the record, that its intention is to revise its guidance on the operation of the public benefit requirement whenever there has been a material change in that requirement justifying a revision. Such a change could, for example, arise or take place after a decision of the new Charity Appeal Tribunal or a court. The commission might also want to revise its guidance when there has been no such change—to amend the wording, layout or presentation of the documentation to make it easier to read, more accessible and more comprehensive, for example. Therefore, to compel the commission to revise not just review its guidance in unspecified circumstances—that is how the amendment would leave it—and at unspecified intervals, to take up the point made by the noble Lord, Lord Swinfen, is neither necessary nor helpful. The noble Lord, Lord Wedderburn, can be assured from what I said about the commission’s intention that the guidance will be kept appropriately up-to-date. I am sure that the commission will examine it frequently to ensure that that is the case. Clearly, it is in the commission’s best interests to ensure that people involved in making applications and so forth have access to common and easily understood guidance. Because of that, I invite the noble Lord to withdraw his amendment.