Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord De Mauley (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Monday, 28 January 2008. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee proceeding on Regulatory Enforcement and Sanctions Bill [HL].


Regulatory Enforcement and Sanctions Bill [HL]

I am grateful to the Minister for his response. I would make the point that while some local authorities will incur additional cost as a result of this system, others will presumably save because they will not have to repeat the work all across the country. The fact that there is not what I might call an equalisation procedure as between local authorities ought not really to be the problem of business. Having said that, I am attracted to the idea of the noble Lord, Lord Hodgson, of a right of appeal. I will read the Minister’s words carefully and, on the understanding that we can come back to this, I shall withdraw my opposition to the clause. Clause 29 agreed to. Clause 30 [LBRO support]: [Amendment No. 100A not moved.] Clause 30 agreed to. [Amendments Nos. 101 and 101A not moved.] Clause 31 [LBRO guidance]: [Amendment No. 102 not moved.] Clause 31 agreed to. [Amendment No. 103 not moved.] Clauses 32 and 33 agreed to.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
698 c268GC 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Business Fees and charges Exemptions Franchises Local government Powers of entry Small businesses Regulation Local Better Regulation Office
Legislation
Regulatory Enforcement and Sanctions Bill (HL) 2007-08
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk