All 1 Debates between Lord Cormack and Baroness Barker

Wed 14th Dec 2016
National Citizen Service Bill [HL]
Lords Chamber

3rd reading (Hansard): House of Lords

National Citizen Service Bill [HL]

Debate between Lord Cormack and Baroness Barker
3rd reading (Hansard): House of Lords
Wednesday 14th December 2016

(7 years, 5 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate National Citizen Service Act 2017 View all National Citizen Service Act 2017 Debates Read Hansard Text Amendment Paper: HL Bill 82-I Marshalled list for Third Reading (PDF, 58KB) - (13 Dec 2016)
Lord Cormack Portrait Lord Cormack (Con)
- Hansard - -

My Lords, I strongly support the amendment and admire the concise way in which my noble friend introduced it. I would like to take advantage of his mentioning the review that has been announced today merely to express the hope—this will not come as a surprise to him as I have taken part at Second Reading, in Committee and on Report and made similar points on each occasion—that the review will be able to look at the wider concept of citizenship and the possibility of the sort of national citizenship scheme that I advocated on those earlier occasions. I would be grateful for the Minister’s assurance that this will fall within the remit of the committee that is to report in October of next year.

Baroness Barker Portrait Baroness Barker (LD)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, I thank the Minister for the way he introduced this amendment. When the noble Lord, Lord Cromwell, spoke to this matter in Committee and on Report, he was clear that his primary concern was not financial misconduct but that wider behaviour was at the heart of this. Charity legislation has had to grapple with this very difficult matter in the past. The Minister may know that during the passage of the draft Protection of Charities Bill we had a lengthy discussion about how one puts this concern into law. I note that this amendment still sits within a clause headed “Notification of financial difficulties”. Will the purport of this measure be made clear in guidance—that is, that it is not about financial matters but about safeguarding and wider issues of that nature?