My Lords, this may be one of those rare occasions when I am pleased not to be the Minister answering the noble Lord’s questions. As the Minister knows, we welcome this consolidation. The comments that have been made highlight what the legislation seeks to achieve. The noble Lord raised similar issues at Second Reading. I have to confess that he lost me somewhat when he spoke in that debate. However, I have carefully read the points that he made. It strikes me that we are attempting to make the legislation more straightforward, less complex and easier but we are not making it easy. I noted that the noble Lord mentioned making the measure more understandable to the lay person. I am not sure that we are ever able to make such legislation more understandable to the lay person. This is very much a lawyer’s issue. My noble friend Lord Boateng has queried whether people need a lawyer to help them set up a charity. If the noble Lord, Lord Phillips, will forgive my saying so, I fear that we have two lawyers and three opinions on this issue as it seems to comprise an argument between lawyers.
I confess that I do not understand the legal complexities which would allow me to make a distinction between ““charitable purpose”” or ““charitable purposes””. I cannot see the difference between those two phrases. However, I fully understand the necessity to get definitions right so as to avoid long drawn out arguments in court. I have carefully read the report of the Joint Committee on Consolidation Bills. We should be grateful to it for considering the points that we put to it. It has also considered the point that the noble Lord has made. All I can do is to seek advice on this from the Minister. I am sure that she has received legal advice on whether this is a justifiable concern. Is she able to share that legal advice with us? If there is an issue around the definition, how significant will that be in terms of interpretation? Her advice would be helpful in enabling the Committee to reach a conclusion on this matter and in reassuring us that the Bill does what it seeks to do and that the definition is satisfactory.
Charities Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Smith of Basildon
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 12 September 2011.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Charities Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
730 c583-4 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 18:27:26 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_768730
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_768730
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_768730