HL Deb 14 June 1991 vol 529 cc1314-6

1.36 p.m.

Viscount Astor rose to move that the regulations laid before the House on 20th May be approved [21st Report from the Joint Committee].

The noble Viscount said: My Lords, these regulations set out amendments to certain of the fees for the statutory activities of Companies House executive agency. The main changes are to the annual return fee, which is increased from £25 to £32, and to the search fee, which rises from £2.75 to £3. In addition, the fee for registering a change of name is increased from £40 to £50. I am pleased to say that there is no change to the incorporation fee, which remains at £50, the level set in 1973.

As an executive agency, Companies House is committed to providing its many customers with a high quality service which represents good value for money. However, the agency has a duty to recover all the costs involved in running the system of regulating companies and developing company law. It is necessary to make these changes in order to achieve a broad balance between income and the relevant costs.

This is only the second increase in the annual return fee since 1975, when the fee was set at £20, which is equivalent to around £80 today. The increase is necessary mainly to meet the higher cost of investigations under the Companies Act, which have become increasingly complex and expensive in recent years. The higher search fee is necessary to ensure that the Companies House search service fully covers its costs. I beg to move.

Moved, That the regulations laid before the House on 20th May be approved [21st Report from the Joint Committee].—(Viscount Astor.)

Lord Graham of Edmonton

My Lords, in the unavoidable absence of my noble friend Lord Williams from the Chamber, he has asked me to say on his behalf that on this side of the House we recognise the necessity of the regulations and the reasonableness of the increase. We shall not oppose their passage through this House.

I note that the increase is from £25 to £32 which is an increase of 28 per cent. Is there a raison d'être for that? Is it related to the increase in the cost of living? It is three years since the fees were raised. Are we to take it that that figure is reached by multiplying three by seven? How long does the Minister expect the increases to be in place? The registration of a company name has increased from £40 to £50, which is an increase of 25 per cent. The fee for the inspection of records has increased from £2.75 to £3, which is an increase of 25 pence or one-eleventh, which is less than 10 per cent. I know that it is difficult to uplift charges by the same amount but perhaps the Minister will tell me and those outside the House who may be interested what is the rationale for the increases.

I am surprised to see that the cost of a photocopy of a document is the subject of secondary legislation. One sees reference to paper copies of records, which means photocopies. The cost is itemised as 10p, 20p, 50p and so on. Is it necessary for the photocopying costs of documents of this kind—we all appreciate their importance—to appear? That surprises me.

These are not nit-picking points; they are points of interest which I picked up while sitting for a few moments after my noble friend Lord Williams asked me to take up the matter. That is the best that I can do on a Friday afternoon.

Viscount Astor

My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Graham, has been extremely astute in instantly picking up that the increases vary for the various fees. It is nothing to do with percentage increases. It reflects the amount of work involved and the costs that have arisen in certain areas. For example, the increase in the annual return fee is due to the increased wider costs of regulating companies, particularly the higher costs of inspections under the Companies Act. In recent years there has been a trend towards increasingly complex and expensive cases. It therefore reflects the costs involved of the separate matters.

I make the same point in regard to photocopying. I do not know how many documents are copied but all the amounts of money add up. We are attempting in some way to balance the books so that everything Companies House is required to do returns an adequate fee that relates to the costs involved.

Lord Graham of Edmonton

My Lords, I am grateful to the Minister. I cannot think of a better source from which the costs of this service—a service provided by the Government—should come than from companies and those involved in company legislation. I am grateful to the Minister. I entirely accept that we are attempting to recover the costs of the service and not match them to anything. Perhaps in two or three years' time when costs have increased we may be faced with a similar order. I am well satisfied.

On Question, Motion agreed to.

House adjourned at nineteen minutes before two o'clock.