Proceeding contribution from Pat McFadden (Labour) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 10 July 2008. It occurred during Debate on bill on Regulatory Enforcement and Sanctions Bill [Lords].
Regulatory Enforcement and Sanctions Bill [Lords]
It is important to remind ourselves of one of the central purposes of the Bill, which is to ensure consistency in regulatory enforcement. This goes back to the Hampton report of a few years ago, which identified a significant problem of inconsistency of enforcement around the country. That is where the idea of the primary authority/enforcement authority relationship comes from. We are not starting from a perfect situation in which inconsistencies do not exist. For example, we heard the case of a manufacturer for a multi-site business which cleared a new product line with its primary authority, under the voluntary system that operates at present, before dispatching the product to the retailer. Despite that, a different local authority believed that the product violated regulations and threatened the store with prosecution. The manufacturer claims that the incident cost them £25,000 in wasted stock. That is what can happen when we do not have clear rules that ensure consistency.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 478 c1583
- Session
- 2007-08
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Complaints Costs Business Local government Powers Standards Small businesses Regulation Local Better Regulation Office
- Legislation
- Regulatory Enforcement and Sanctions Bill (HL) 2007-08
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-16 02:08:26 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_491733
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_491733
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_491733