Charities Bill [HL]

moved Amendment No. 13:"Page 77, leave out lines 35 to 42 and insert—" ““5   (1)   The Commission shall appoint a chief executive and may appoint such other staff as it may determine. (2)   The chief executive and other staff of the Commission shall be appointed with such remuneration and on such other terms as the Commission may determine. (3)   Employment as a member of the Commission or the staff of the Commission shall be included among the kinds of employment to which a superannuation scheme under section 1 of the Superannuation Act 1972 can apply.”” The noble Lord said: This amendment concerns Schedule 1, which is the details relating to the Charity Commission and in particular the Charity Commission’s staff. It is of course concerned with the buttressing of the   Charity Commission’s independence—a matter on which many noble Lords have today stressed importance. The amendment replaces the current wording, which states that any appointments by the commission require the approval of the Minister for the   Civil Service. The new wording gives the commission the ability to appoint members with complete independence. I said in my remarks at Second Reading that the structure of the committee was a topic that we intended to continue to probe because we felt that more could still be done to achieve an entirely independent Charity Commission. It is important to reiterate that we seek to be reassured that the Charity Commission will be truly insulated from political pressures of any kind. We are very grateful to the Government for having taken on board some steps toward achieving this independence by accepting the amendment which now appears in new Section 1A(4) in Clause 6, by ensuring that:"““In the exercise of its functions the Commission shall not be subject to the direction or control of any Minister of the Crown or other government department””." However, Schedule 1 still stipulates in paragraph 5 on page 77, that:"““The appointment of a chief executive requires the approval of the Minister for the Civil Service as to the chief executive’s terms and conditions of service””." So, as an ““independent”” body—note I put the word independent in quotes—the commission must still go to the Minister for the Civil Service and ask for permission to take on new members, and it remains tied to the Minister’s rates of pay on staffing levels and conditions of work. Is that really independence? One can easily envisage a situation where a political Minister—of   whatever colour—could seek to influence the commission by giving or withholding assent to various staffing decisions. In my view, the commission should have the organisational and structural freedom to make its own way and attract men and women of quality to work for it. We have already argued this case extensively in earlier Committee sittings on the previous print of the Bill, before the general election. I do not propose to weary the Committee with further repetition. All I ask is for the Government to take this one last step to achieve a truly independent Charity Commission. I beg to move.