---

Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill

My Lords, I do not propose to return to the question of the interpretation of the European Court of Justice or of social legislation. Suffice it to say that, if social legislation deriving from purely domestic measures sets higher standards than those in the directive, my amendment would not affect those social rules, which derive from purely domestic legislation. It would therefore in no way inhibit the United Kingdom from having higher standards than those in the directive. I quite take the point about the possibility of measures for a directive that go wider than the terms of the directive widening the risk of references to the European Court of Justice. However, when we are talking about domestic rules—purely community regulations rather than the directives themselves, because the directives must always be implemented in some form—I was concerned to underline the principle of the last word on the interpretation of a directive or directive-derived legislation always being with the European Court of Justice. I am most grateful to the Minister. I have found these exchanges very useful, both because the noble and learned Lord, Lord Davidson, will not report until long after the Bill is put to bed and because the Minister has given me an idea or two in the context of the Cabinet guidance. I shall not return at Third Reading with this amendment, but I might return with a more nuanced attempt to have some reference to this very important subject put into the Bill. Meanwhile, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. Clause 31 [Consequential amendments]: