Charities Bill [HL]

Again, we discussed this issue at Second Reading, as the noble Lord rightly said. The Committee discussed this matter earlier today and we are in agreement with the general intention behind this amendment, but we do not think that it is necessary. There is no doubt that the commission should take into account the interests of those affected by its actions. Two of the principles of best regulatory practice on the face of the Bill are that regulatory action should be ““accountable”” and ““transparent””, and these will involve the commission having regard to the interests of stakeholders. The commission already takes customer service seriously. Last year, it established a group called the Customer Network for people from across the sector, including but not limited to trustees. Members of the group are invited to give feedback, suggestions and views on a wide range of policy issues. There are currently 65 members, but the commission hopes to increase this to 150, reflecting the diversity of the sector in terms of income levels, charitable activity and location and there is more information on the commission’s website about the network. The commission also has a devoted customer service section led by a senior member of staff and there is a customer service champion at board level. And the commission’s strategic review emphasised that it wants to continue taking into account the interests of its stakeholders. In the review, it states that it will,"““encourage greater dialogue with charities and trustee, becoming better listeners and being more collaborative, outcome-focussed and””—" the noble Lord’s word—““proactive””. So again, we see that the amendment is well-intentioned. We absolutely understand why it is there, but there is no need for it in the Bill. I hope that I have   been able to reassure the noble Lord that the commission—indeed, the Government—takes this issue as seriously as it is clear he does.