---

Regulatory Enforcement and Sanctions Bill [HL]

Leaving out the clause would avoid the situation where a business that has in good faith paid all its taxes and rates, which are supposed to cover the cost of regulatory supervision, is forced to pay a second time for the same thing. While a business may benefit from the appointment of a primary authority, it must be recognised that the role of the primary authority as outlined in the Bill is weaker than that of the home or lead authority service, which is already provided at no cost. Co-ordination systems such as this save local authorities across the country considerable sums by relieving them of the need to agree local inspection plans and to provide advice and guidance to multi-site businesses locally. One might reasonably ask how and why home and lead authorities have been able to perform this function until now for no charge. The answer, I suspect, is that the benefits are two-way for business and local government. That is why local authorities have been prepared to engage in the current voluntary schemes. It would be unfortunate if business concluded that the cost of paying a supplementary amount for these services outweighed the benefits of continuing with these arrangements.