Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Bill [HL]

moved Amendment No. 175: "Page 28, line 5, at end insert ““either with or without modifications””" The noble Baroness said: This amendment would allow Parliament to amend orders that will amend the definition of what constitutes regulated activity under Clause 5(3). I am concerned that reserving the listing of behaviour to regulations could lead to offences being inappropriately designated. The regulation-making process seems to differ from that normally adopted in a Bill, the powers arising from a combination of paragraphs 11 and 19 of Schedule 2. Even the positive resolution procedure is a blunt tool for legislative scrutiny as it does not allow amendment of a proposed regulation. Parliamentarians may agree with some, but not all, of a list of offences being included in proposed regulations, but they will be unable to amend it. It is difficult to imagine a situation in which parliamentarians, when dealing with such an important and emotive issue as the protection of children and vulnerable adults, would not vote for a list of offences leading to an absolute bar, even if they felt that conviction or caution for one or more of the offences contained on the list were not justified. For anyone affected, the impact will be dramatic. Anyone who is given a caution for one of these offences will be subject to an absolute bar. They will not be able to make any representations and they will not be able to appeal. Similarly, parliamentarians may be concerned that the scope of regulated activity changed under Clause 5(3) is too broad or that a list of amending provisions made under Clause 47(2) is excessive. Because of that, I believe it is appropriate to enable full legislative scrutiny and parliamentary debate on such changes. The power to amend regulations should be written into the Bill. I beg to move.