---

Regulatory Enforcement and Sanctions Bill [Lords]

I agree. Let me give an example that I cited in Committee. Coventry council prosecuted Tesco for selling out-of-date food, and the supermarket was fined £133,000. The procedures agreed between the primary authority and Tesco were perfectly good, but they were not being implemented properly by a local store. However well run a primary authority may be, is it really best placed to say whether a business in a certain area is following exactly the advice that it has been given, or is the local authority that inspected the store best placed to do that? Equally, does the LBRO—a small, unelected and untried quango—really know better than a local authority what poses a risk to people in the area? The amendment would give the primary authority an opportunity to advise the prosecuting authority that it does not agree with the action that it is taking, and that advice would be disclosable if the matter came to court. A business that was prosecuted or appealed against an enforcement notice would be able to produce that advice in support of its case. Local authorities do not take enforcement action against businesses without serious thought, and a local authority which has been advised that the primary authority believes that the action should not proceed will clearly consider the matter again very carefully before allowing it to proceed. The amendment retains the provisions that prevent the authority from acting without consulting the primary authority. However, I believe that if, after consideration, a council decides to take action, it should be for a court to determine whether that action is right, not an unaccountable quango—and not another local authority which will not have to answer to the voters of say, Wolverhampton if it fails to protect them. Defending clause 28 in Committee, the Minister said:"““Neither LBRO nor the primary authority can give a once-and-for-all answer about the legality of a particular approach. Rightly, that decision must lie with the courts.””––[Official Report, Regulatory Enforcement and Sanctions Public Bill Committee, 19 June 2008; c. 124.]" I agree with that sentiment, but the clause as it stands will deny a court the chance to rule on the proposed action if the primary authority and the LBRO veto it.