Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Baroness Wilcox (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Thursday, 12 June 2008. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee proceeding on Energy Bill.


Energy Bill

moved Amendment No. 4: 4: Clause 8, page 5, line 15, at end insert— "““( ) A person guilty of an offence under this section is also liable to be subject to a bar on future licence applications under this Chapter, for a period of time to be determined by the Secretary of State.””" The noble Baroness said: Amendment No. 4, which is grouped with Amendments Nos. 5, 6 and 10, concerns barring future licence applications for offenders. These amendments would add an extra penalty for offences regarding licences, and specifically they would bar offenders under this section from future licence applications. We are not entirely convinced that the fines are an adequate deterrent to the offences under this section. The statutory maximum fine, as mentioned in the Explanatory Notes, is £5,000 for England and twice that for Scotland. The companies developing these facilities have very deep pockets and it might even be worth their while to take the hit and continue in breach of the law. We are very keen to see the chance of that happening taken out of the Bill. I understand that there may be some provision in regulation to place such a bar on bodies seeking future licences if they are in breach of the law, but does the Minister think that that is sufficient? How is it triggered? Does it require the Secretary of State to judge the nature of the offence himself and then personally decide to bar future applications? It seems that the Government are not opposed to the idea of barring future applications for offenders; it is merely the mechanism that we are discussing. Surely having something in the Bill would be the most effective way in which to deter such offences. If there is a quasi-subjective power for the Secretary of State to bar someone after they have committed an offence, this seems like a much weaker deterrent. At best, under the mechanism in the Bill as it stands, we can hope to close the stable door after the horse has bolted. Does the Minister not agree that deterrence is the goal here? If so, is not having something in the Bill the most effective deterrent? I beg to move.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
702 c267-8GC 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Disclosure of information Decommissioning Carbon dioxide Carbon capture and storage Commercial secrets Licensing Inspections Environment protection Energy Industrial accidents EU emissions trading scheme Natural gas Offshore industry Storage Seas and oceans Carbon emissions
Legislation
Energy Bill 2007-08
Draft Marine Bill
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk