Charities Bill [HL]

My Lords, I am delighted to support the amendment of the noble Baroness, Lady Pitkeathley, as it is supported by other Members of your Lordships’ House. I well remember the debate on charitable giving which the noble Lord, Lord Joffe, initiated a year or two ago—an extremely rich experience. I believe that in one of Wavell’s books or lectures on leadership he says that nobody is going to get into that book or lecture unless he has led an army in defeat. That is itself an admirable criterion. I have recently been unable to find the reference and, if anybody can point me towards it, I shall be grateful. There is no question that it is easier to lead a growth organisation than one in retreat, which is perhaps why Wavell set the test. It is just as easy to say that one is pro-philanthropy as it was for President Coolidge to say that the preacher was against sin. We recently had a debate about museums, to which it is possible that the noble Lord, Lord Davies of Oldham, replied. Exactly the same issue came up in that context. As I recall, one of the questions the noble Lord, Lord Davies, was asked—both by my noble friend Lord Eccles and, wholly incidentally, by myself—was when the Government were going to produce a reply to the Gooderson review, which the Government had asked Sir Nicholas Gooderson to produce on this very subject: how we increase the flow of gifts into the museum sector. The issues which the noble Baroness, Lady Pitkeathley, has brought forward, as supported by the noble Lord, Lord Joffe, are exactly the same and analogous. It is important that pressure on the Government to respond on these issues remains just as strong in this case as it does in the other. For that reason, I am happy to be a signatory to the amendment.