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]
The LBRO will be responsible for giving advice to local authorities. We hope that they will have regard to that when enforcing regulations. Parts of the Bill offer benefits for a consumer who is carrying out a transaction with a business that operates only in the local authority area. Part 2, which we are discussing, is specifically about the primary authority and enforcement authority situation. Let me turn properly to the amendments moved by the hon. Member for Solihull (Lorely Burt). I echo the comments of the hon. Member for Hertford and Stortford (Mr. Prisk) and commend the hon. Lady on her persistence in pursuing some of the points. However, I am afraid that I shall not be able to accept them on behalf of the Government today. Let me set out why. The amendments would remove the powers that the Bill creates for the primary authority or the LBRO to give directions that an enforcement action should not go ahead and substitutes for them an advice-giving power. I understand that that is about protecting local authorities’ discretion to pursue enforcement actions should they choose to do so. Let me say how we want the primary authority scheme to operate. I referred to the importance of consistency, and businesses have asked us to provide access to a scheme that will provide more dependable advice that they can rely on and that will provide a quicker resolution of disputes between authorities, which will give greater certainty and clarity not just for them but for their customers, too. That is why we are looking for the right balance between that and local authorities’ freedom to act. The Government starts from the principle that when a business and a local authority have gone to the trouble of establishing a primary authority for regulation there should be a presumption that the advice given by one professional in one part of the country should be respected by other professionals across the country unless, of course, there are good reasons. There are some safeguards. The amendment, however, would not provide that as it would remove the primary authority’s ability to intervene decisively in how a business was treated. The hon. Member for Hertford and Stortford referred to the potential for confusion. I believe that the amendments would result in more confusion than the Bill as it stands because they would give far greater freedom for an enforcement authority to ignore the advice of a primary authority than under the relationship that we are trying to construct.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 478 c1584
- 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 00:08:48 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_491737
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_491737
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_491737