Health Bill

Until we have spelt out the requirements in the regulations, it is difficult for the industry or anyone else to say precisely what the costs of the signage requirements will be. The noble Lord, Lord Naseby, quoted a number of other concerns. I think that he referred to the questions and perfectly legitimate points raised during the consultation process. We are listening to the arguments. I reassure noble Lords that we are very much minded to provide only light requirements for signage and we are committed to consult on that. We are not seeking to impose burdens for the sake of doing so. We have listened to the points raised in the consultation which the noble Lord, Lord Naseby, mentioned and we want to respond sensitively to them. Just because the regulations will set out requirements, it does not mean that signs will not be differentiated between different sets of circumstances. It does not mean that the requirements will be complex. We want to go about this in a sensible way, but we regard signage using internationally recognised signs as critical in making clear to the people occupying these premises what the rules of the game are. A number of noble Lords raised the subject of enforcement, but the signage will make enforcement easier to administer. The noble Lord, Lord Stoddart, asked a number of questions concerning whether someone could be charged with more than one offence. That is a matter for the enforcement authority. The signage offence is basically a failure to display a sign. I hope that that helps the noble Lord. He also raised the subject of the level 4 fine of £2,500 for some offences. As I said to the noble Earl, Lord Howe, during our debate on the earlier amendment, that is a maximum fine. The more likely outcome is that that fine will be applied to a repeat offender and not to someone committing a first offence. We have to bear that in mind, and that is true of all the fine categories. They are maximum-level fines; not necessarily the fines that will be administered in all cases.