Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Newton of Braintree (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Monday, 28 April 2008. It occurred during Debate on bill on Regulatory Enforcement and Sanctions Bill [HL].


Regulatory Enforcement and Sanctions Bill [HL]

My Lords, I rise with some diffidence, not having taken part in earlier stages of these fairly extended proceedings. When I read the report of the last round—that is, Report stage on 31 March this year—I noted that the Minister accurately quoted the views of the Administrative Justice and Tribunals Council, formerly the Council on Tribunals, which I have the privilege of chairing, in support of his arguments. He also, rather less helpfully, adverted to the fact that I was not in my place at the time, and I thought that I would make up for that deficiency by ensuring that I was here on this occasion. I can confirm that what the Minister said about the position of the council which I chair was accurate and that it supports both the broad approach set out in the Macrory penalties review and the approach set out in the Bill on this particular point. I will repeat the specific words that the Minister quoted on the previous occasion from our response of 16 August 2007: "““The Council does not think it appropriate, in the context of the Macrory review, to continue to use the criminal courts for hearing appeals””.—[Official Report, 31/3/08; col. 831.]" Against that background, I was very pleased to hear what my noble and learned friend said about the merits of tribunals. Tribunals already do a great deal of work in comparable matters, including, not least, the Financial Services and Markets Tribunal, with which the noble Lord, Lord Borrie, will be very familiar from his former role. I do not wish to labour the point, but in general I think, as does the senior president, Lord Justice Carnwath, to whom reference has been made, that tribunals are very well-equipped to carry out the kind of work envisaged here, with the specialist knowledge and expertise, which they bring to so many areas. I have a great deal of sympathy with the arguments put by the noble Lord, Lord Borrie, and I hope that, against that background, my noble and learned friend will understand that if he were to test the opinion of the House I might be in some difficulty in following him.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
701 c29-30 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Appeals Business Fines Local government Standards Tribunals Regulation Local Better Regulation Office Stop notices
Legislation
Regulatory Enforcement and Sanctions Bill (HL) 2007-08
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk