---

Company Law Reform Bill [HL]

I am sorry; I simply do not understand that. I have just given an example of where the panel needs to be able to disclose information. I understood the noble Baroness to agree, for example, that the panel needs the ability to disclose information that it has obtained about the commission of a serious criminal offence. If the noble Baroness wants me to go through each of the gateways and demonstrate why it is appropriate—or if the Opposition wish to table an amendment to each and every one of these gateways pointing out why it is unnecessary—then I will deal with the matter. Let me make one other general point. The noble Baroness keeps coming back to what she describes as the general law on confidentiality. The common law on confidentiality is a very weak tool indeed. It provides that where information has been obtained in confidence, the court may restrain the further dissemination of such information. It is recognised that the court will not grant an injunction to do so in certain circumstances, including where the public interest may override the interest in non-disclosure. That is quite different from having an overriding obligation such as that which will be in place. In Article 4.3 of the takeovers directive the relevant provision states:"““Member States shall ensure that all persons employed or formerly employed by their supervisory authorities are bound by professional secrecy. No information covered by professional secrecy may be divulged to any person or authority except under provisions laid down by law””." Following the takeovers directive requirement, the Bill therefore proposes that there should be a general prohibition on disclosure subject to the gateways set out in Clause 623(3). There has been a great deal of consultation on this issue and a number of experienced people have considered it, but if there is a problem with a particular gateway which is thought to be inappropriate, I am very happy to respond and explain why we think it is appropriate—and, indeed, to look at it again if there is a good case made—either inside or outside the Committee. I think it is quite clear that the case has been made for gateways, and we have produced a list of gateways. If there is a problem with one of them, let us look at it—but I do not think it would be a good use of the Committee’s time for me now to attempt to go through each and every one of the gateways set out in the schedule and to make the case as to why it is appropriate. It is absolutely plain and obvious why it is important that many of them should be there but, if the noble Baroness agrees, we can deal with the issue in the way I have proposed.