Proceeding contribution from Lord Lyell of Markyate (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 30 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 thank the Minister for a very full and careful answer and for the promise of further information. The further information will be of real help to the Committee and the Chamber because, while kind things have been said about the work I put into this, I have not achieved everything by any means. I have just seen a Regulatory Enforcement and Sanctions Bill impact assessment, which my noble friend Lord Cope passed to me. That suggests that there will be something like an increase of about 4,000 or 4,500 cases a year. It looks as though, if I have read it correctly, there will be some 13,000 cases in the future, a quarter of which are estimated will go to appeal. The figures the noble Lord will give us—perhaps he will put a copy of them in the Library at the same time—will show what the ambit is. From the Macrory report I obtained about 15,000 cases. Then I looked at other tables in the report and I obtained more than 30,000 cases. Far more cases may be going on than the impact assessment suggests. There will be about 4,000 appeals. If I have read and got the figures right—I can be corrected by letter if necessary— and according to page 33 of the impact assessment, the total cost to business of preparing for an appeal before the independent and expert tribunal will be approximately £1.6 million. That is £400 a case. I doubt that a solicitor would be able to do it in three or four hours, and given the price of even a country solicitor that would mop up a good deal more than £400. It certainly would do so by the time there had been a hearing and so forth. The burdens may well therefore be underestimated in the minds of those who prepared the assessment. That is why I returned to my point that we have the ordinary courts that are well understood. I am grateful to the Minister for pointing out that Professor Macrory suggests constructive ways of improving the use of the courts. I am glad to hear that a substantial use of the courts will continue. The Minister has been kind enough to say that he will go back and look at the matter. Obviously, he has made no commitment to change anything and I fully appreciate that. There are serious issues, but in the light of that, and thanking him for the further information that is to come, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. [Amendment No. 105 not moved.]
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 698 c342-3GC
- Session
- 2007-08
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords Grand Committee
- Subjects
- Courts Business Civil proceedings Civil Aviation Authority Enforcement Fixed penalties Ofgem Fines Regulation Local Better Regulation Office Stop notices
- Legislation
- European Communities Act 1972
- Regulatory Enforcement and Sanctions Bill (HL) 2007-08
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-16 02:37:55 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_440654
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_440654
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_440654