Moved by
That the Regulations laid before the House on 6 July be approved.
Relevant document: 23rd Report from the Secondary Legislation
Scrutiny Committee. Considered in Grand Committee on 14
September.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Work
and Pensions ()
(Con)
My Lords, in moving this Motion I should clarify remarks I made
during the debate on these regulations, which took place in Grand
Committee on Monday, concerning their application to certain
charitable incorporated organisations. Following the making and
laying of these regulations, the Department for Digital, Culture,
Media and Sport made the Charitable Incorporated Organisations
(Insolvency and Dissolution) (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulations
2020, which disapplied Section A51 of the Insolvency Act 1986 in
relation to charitable incorporated organisations. Section A51
was cited in the making of the SI before the House, which means
that as a result of the DCMS regulations the provisions in this
SI have not applied to charitable incorporated organisations
since 13 August 2020. This does not affect the validity of the
powers used to make these regulations; the powers applied to
charitable incorporated organisations at the time this SI was
made. Likewise, its application to charitable incorporated
organisations until 13 August is not affected.
The legal effect of the DCMS SI is one of implied repeal of the
provisions from that date onwards. So far as they apply to
charitable incorporated organisations, a legal position, we
think, is clear. The Department for Digital, Culture, Media and
Sport has since indicated in a memorandum to the Joint Committee
on Statutory Instruments its intention to bring forward
legislation, at the next available opportunity, to correct the
position to that reflected in the regulations before the House
today.
(Lab)
My Lords, I am grateful to the Minister, but I cannot have been
the only one in your Lordships’ House struggling to follow the
information she gave to us. I was not 100% clear because she said
that the “legal position, we think, is clear”. I do not know
whether that means “We are not sure whether it is clear; we only
think it is clear”, or whether those who debated this in
Committee have been made aware of the information she has brought
before your Lordships’ House today.
I have not fully understood the implications of everything she
said—I do not know whether other noble Lords have. It may be that
it has no material impact, but maybe it does. Before we agree
this Motion today, I wonder whether she ought to consult those
who were in that Committee so that everyone who debated the
regulations is clear that there is no material difference, given
the rather lengthy and complex explanation she has given today.
(Con)
I am happy to respond to the noble Baroness’s points; this is,
indeed, a complex matter. I am confident that the legislation we
intend to bring forward at the earliest opportunity will clarify
matters, but I will consult with the Members of the Grand
Committee to make sure that everybody is clear about the impact
of this change.
The Senior Deputy Speaker ()
The Question is that the Motion in the name of the noble
Baroness, Lady Stedman-Scott, be agreed to. As many—
(Lab)
My Lords, I think that the Minister has just said that, before
agreeing it, she will take it back to Members to see if they are
happy with it because there is some complication. That was the
implication of what she said: she was not going to put it forward
for a vote today until she had consulted people.
She is checking with the Clerk so I will keep talking for a
second while she gets advice. However, I am still not clear. I
thought she said she was agreeing to take it back and consult
with Members who were on that Committee.
(Con)
I am advised that I am not able to withdraw the Motion, but I am
quite happy to make sure that people understand exactly what is
meant. I beg to move.
The Senior Deputy Speaker ()
The Question is that the Motion in the name of the noble
Baroness, Lady Stedman-Scott, be agreed to. As many as are of
that opinion will say “Content”; to the contrary “Not content”.
Noble Lords
Content.
The Senior Deputy Speaker ()
The Contents have it.
Noble Lords
Not Content.
(Lab)
My Lords, I will not necessarily push this to a vote at the
moment, but I say to the Minister that the reason why she says it
cannot be withdrawn is that it comes into force today. If she has
not consulted Members of the Committee on something so complex
before bringing a Motion to your Lordships’ House today, there is
a serious issue here. Are these “made affirmative” regulations,
which come into force whether we debate and agree them or not? I
am not clear. I have to be honest that I am completely at a loss
as to what is happening at the moment, but it seems that there is
some question mark over the validity of this and whether it is
correct. I may be wrong and everything may be in order. However,
it was complex and I did not fully understand what she was
putting forward today.
(Con)
I advise that they are “made affirmative” and to be dealt with
today. I can only reaffirm what I have said: it is a complex
matter but I am confident that the legislation we intend to bring
forward at the earliest opportunity will clarify matters.
The Senior Deputy Speaker ()
If that is of sufficient clarity, I will ask the Question.
Motion agreed.
