---

Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill

My Lords, I thank the Minister for replying so fully to my amendments, and the noble Lord, Lord Norton of Louth and the noble Baroness, Lady Harris, for their support for elements of them. I hope that the way in which my amendments were framed did not suggest that I was trying to reduce the scrutiny of this House to whatever is applied to a code or guidance. I still think that any guidance should be subject to consultation and scrutiny. On Amendments Nos. 6 to 10, the enforcement concordat set up by the previous Act had barely come into existence when Philip Hampton produced his admirable report, so it was a little rash of the Government to say that it was not working and probably a bit premature to declare it defunct before it had properly come to breath. I look forward to seeing the second draft of the code and the listing order. The Government are clearly placing a great reliance on the listing order to provide a differential approach to different regulatory functions in different regulators. I do not share their confidence. I think that we will be spending quite a long time on that order in this House. Thereafter, I believe that the only way in which we will be able to judge this part of the Bill will be by assessing the proof of the pudding in the eating and deciding whether, after some of these arrangements have been in place for a short or medium amount of time, they are contributing to better regulation or to vexatious litigation. As the Government show no signs of moving, despite the spontaneous uprising of support across the House for my amendment, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. Clause 22 [Code of practice]: [Amendments Nos. 6 to 8 not moved.] Clause 23 [Code of practice: procedure]: [Amendments Nos. 9 and 10 not moved.]