---

Consumer Credit Bill

My Lords, on the face of it this seems an unobjectionable, harmless, even useful amendment, but when we look at the three regulatory objectives as described in the amendment, the first one, the protection of consumers, is to my mind a statement of the obvious. The OFT has been operating the Consumer Credit Act for more than 30 years. No one has suggested that it has had some different kind of objective from the one set forth there—the protection of the consumer. Let me take the third regulatory objective set out: maintaining a competitive market in consumer credit. That sits well enough with the Office of Fair Trading’s various and in recent years increasing powers to promote competition and handle monopolies, restrictive practices and anti-competitive practices of all kinds. It hardly needs a specific reference in this legislation in view of that. The second regulatory objective that the amendment desires to set out is the promotion of an efficient and innovative consumer credit industry. I am not sure how anybody can pursue that unless it is backed up by some kind of detailed provision in the legislation, which it is not. I am not sure that alongside the protection of consumers, which the noble Lord has admitted is the real primary objective, it is feasible to start thinking that the Office of Fair Trading has all the time to be concerned with whether we have any efficient industry and trying to promote innovative kinds of consumer credit giving. I do not see that as part of the objectives of the OFT and I therefore ask noble Lords to oppose the amendment.