Compensation Bill [HL]

I am not sure that I can follow that. However, I shall, as always, try. I looked at this because, like the noble Lord, Lord Goodhart, I wondered whether the provision was something completely new. I found three examples of legislation where there is a power to set targets: under Section 102 of the Education Act 2005, the Secretary of State may require any local education authority to set targets; under Section 5 of the Local Government Act 1999, the Secretary of State issues guidance stating that authorities should set targets; and Section 38 of the Police Act includes a power for the Secretary of State to direct police authorities to establish levels of performance—that is, performance targets—to be aimed at when seeking to achieve their objectives. There is a bit of a track record of wanting to have targets in legislation. I have been told that if I want the Secretary of State to have the power to set targets, I need to include it on the face of the Bill. It may be important to allow the Secretary of State to set targets as part of performance management and to ensure the appropriate competence of the regulator. We recognise that the Secretary of State has an oversight role and we want to ensure that we have captured it appropriately. I see that as part of what we are doing in this part of the Bill. The Secretary of State may want to set targets specifying timescales for granting authorisation—that is, he might say to the regulator that he expects him to achieve authorisation within a certain timetable—or for handling complaints made to the regulator about authorised persons. There may be other areas where it might be appropriate for targets to be set. We are not obsessive about targets. However, as I think I have said before, having been on the receiving end of government targets as chair of a health authority and as chair of a board of school governors, I know that targets are important tools in ensuring that the highest possible quality of service is provided. They could be an important part of the way in which we develop the role of the regulator. Whether there is scope for things to be left where they are, I do not know. I have started to look at that because I recognise that the aspect is important, but I am not entirely certain yet. That is not a commitment, because I have no idea whether I could be persuaded otherwise on that. I completely see the concern of the noble Lord, Lord Hunt, about how hard one has to do something to ““try to”” do it. On the other hand, to say that the regulator would meet the targets creates another difficulty, because there may be good, reasonable circumstances completely outside the control of the regulator in which a target is not met. For example, a target for the timescale on authorisation might be dependent on a piece of information being returned from a company which was then was out of time. At least in theory, the regulator would have failed to meet the target for something that we would all consider to be minor and not the kind of offence that meant that the regulator should cease to be the regulator. We want the regulator to do everything that he possibly can to meet the target, but we recognise that there may be circumstances when meeting the target is out of that person’s—or company’s or organisation’s—control. I completely accept the point about ““try to”” and I shall take the wording away to see whether I can find a better form of words that captures the essence of making it clear that we would expect the regulator to get there while recognising that there may be circumstances in which he would not be able to do so. That is my position. It is important to be able to set targets and, with a new regulator, whoever he is, it is important that we are clear about his responsibilities. We need to make it clear that, in so doing, we wish every effort to be made but recognise that there may be circumstances that are not be in the regulator’s control. I am very pleased to accept the amendment on the code of practice, Amendment No. 48. The noble Lord has made a good point. I have checked that it is suitable to be inserted in the Bill and that I do not need to reword it in any way, shape or form—so I hope that the noble Lord will be pleased with me.