Consumer Credit Bill

My Lords, like the noble Lord, Lord Borrie, I also regret not having been present in Grand Committee but, unlike the noble Lord, I cannot agree with his arguments. I strongly support my noble friend Lady Miller in Amendments Nos. 2, 3 and 4, and I speak from past experience as the Minister responsible in the previous government for what was then called the Deregulation Task Force and is now called the Better Regulation Task Force. One of my main reasons for strongly supporting the amendments is that the principles of good regulation should always be adhered to, even though some flexibility may be lost. I understand the strength of the argument but, on balance, I believe that the first principle of good regulation is, as is covered in Amendment No. 2, that the regulations may make provision indicating the circumstances. I believe that one needs to be as certain as possible, in protection of both the creditor and the debtor, in stating what is unfair in the relationship. In this instance, I do not think that reliance on court interpretation is correct. In my judgment, consistency and certainty are more important to protect the interests of both borrower and lender. Finally, the second principle is enshrined in Amendments Nos. 3 and 4 by referring to the need for plain, intelligible language. I welcome that. For those reasons, I support Amendments Nos. 2, 3 and 4.