Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Berkeley (Labour) 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]

Perhaps I could pose a supplementary question. The Minister kindly mentioned the Civil Aviation Authority wishing to be withdrawn from Schedule 5. If that is agreed, as I am sure the Committee will agree, that presumably means that there are no offences that the CAA would wish to enforce as the CAA rather than someone else enforcing them, which comes under Clause 35(1)(b), "““a person, other than a designated regulator””." In other words, it is done by someone else, as my noble friend said. Are we in danger of something falling between two stools if an organisation’s name is not in Schedule 5 but there are things that these authorities and many others might have the power to enforce but do not?


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
698 c351GC 
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