here - United Kingdom Parliament

1699 Mau Mau Claims (Settlement) 6 JUNE 2013
1700
drawn in the sand. How does the Foreign Secretary
intend to take the relationship with Kenya forward in
the future?
Mr Hague: I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman
for his support for the statement. The relationship with
Kenya is very important to our country, and I mentioned
a few moments ago the many different dimensions of it.
It is a relationship that we want to expand, in terms of
trade in particular, to the benefit of both nations. It is
also very important for stability in east Africa. Given
the UK’s leading role there, for instance in the work we
do on Somalia, our relations with Kenya, Uganda and
Ethiopia are of great importance, and we give great
attention to them. I hope relations between the UK and
Kenya will develop over the coming years and decades
in a true sense of partnership, with the new generations
moving on fully from everything that happened in the
colonial era. A sense of equal partnership with African
nations is now how we should approach our relationships
with these countries.
Hugh Bayley (York Central) (Lab): I welcome the
statements, expressing regret, made by both the Foreign
Secretary and the shadow Foreign Secretary. The ghastly
impact of Mau Mau on African Kenyan citizens as well
as European settlers is well documented in the wonderful
books by the Kenyan writer Ngugi wa Thiong’o, but we
must accept that there were totally unacceptable actions
by British colonial authorities, and I am glad that has
happened today. We have an important development
relationship with Kenya, and important joint security
concerns, such as on piracy off the coast of Africa. To
what extent will this statement make it easier for our
countries to co-operate, and to do so better than before,
on issues of common interest?
Mr Hague: I hope it will make it easier. It should
remove one of the areas of contention between the UK
and Kenya—or the people of Kenya. The hon. Gentleman
rightly notes the breadth and importance of our
co-operation, so I hope it will smooth the path for our
effective co-operation in the future. Of course that relies
on many other things, however. It relies on the daily
commitment of each nation to make our bilateral relations
work successfully, but I certainly hope this settlement
will be a help, rather than a hindrance, in that very
important process.
Mr Speaker: Order. I am grateful to the Foreign
Secretary and colleagues.
Backbench Business
[1ST ALLOTTED DAY]
Public Administration Committee Report
(Charity Commission)
12.27 pm
Mr Bernard Jenkin (Harwich and North Essex) (Con):
I beg to move,
That this House has considered the matter of the publication
of the Third Report of the Public Administration Select Committee,
The role of the Charity Commission and “public benefit”: Postlegislative
scrutiny of the Charities Act 2006, HC 76.
I am grateful to the Backbench Business Committee
for the opportunity to launch the Public Administration
Committee’s third report of this Session. This is, in
many ways, one of the Committee’s most important
reports. The charitable sector is at the heart of British
society, involving millions of people and with £9.3 billion
received in donations last year. About 25 new applications
for charitable status are received by the Charity Commission
every working day.
The first UK charity was established in the year 597:
the King’s school, Canterbury, which still thrives today.
The regulation of charities in England and Wales started
under Queen Elizabeth I, with the 1601 Statute of
Charitable Uses, which set out the first definition of a
charity in English law and the purposes for which a
charity could be established. The definition of a charity
has remained largely unchanged from that time. Page 8
of our report carries a useful timeline of the development
of charity law since then.
The subject of the Committee’s inquiry was the Charities
Act 2006. Our inquiry followed the Government’s own
review of the Act, carried out by Lord Hodgson of
Astley Abbotts. I hope the House will join me in thanking
my noble Friend for his valuable and meticulous work.
The Committee’s inquiry came at a challenging time
for the Charity Commission. Its budget is being reduced
by 33% in real terms over five years. The Charity
Commission has also become involved in some protracted
legal battles. It lost a case with the Independent Schools
Council and its decision last year to decline an application
for charitable status from the Preston Down Trust, part
of what is called the Plymouth Brethren Christian Church
or, formerly, the Exclusive Brethren—
Paul Flynn (Newport West) (Lab): Will the hon.
Gentleman give way?
Mr Jenkin: I will give way at the end of my remarks.
That decision was challenged and taken to the charity
tribunal—
Paul Flynn: On a point of order, Madam Deputy
Speaker. The hon. Gentleman said that he will give way
at the end of his remarks. I understand that the debate
is time limited, so can he give us some idea of when he is
likely to finish? I am the only other member of the
Committee in the Chamber and I profoundly disagree
with this very poor report. If I am to be gagged and not
allowed to speak by the Chair—