Health Bill

Although the Minister very deftly batted my amendments to the boundary, I am sure he will accept that their purpose was to make a point. In that sense, they are probing amendments. Nevertheless, there is a substantive issue underlying them, which is the avoidance of doubt. That doubt has been largely dispelled in the Minister’s reply, for which I thank him. Between now and the Report stage I may receive further representations on this subject and therefore I cannot guarantee not to bring these matters back at a later stage. However, if there is any doubt lingering in anybody’s mind, perhaps the place to dispel it most effectively is in the guidance which will accompany this legislation. Surely the guidance on enforcement should make it clear what falls within the scope of the Act, as it will be. At the very least, I hope the Minister will take that idea away and consider it. In some circumstances I plead guilty to being rather antique, but I am not sure that in this instance I regard Amendment No. 38 as exemplifying that tendency. I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Monson, for making the point that it was to make the Bill more precise rather than antique that I put forward the amendment. However, as I have said, I am grateful to the Minister and, for the time being, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. On Question, Whether Clause 7 shall stand part of the Bill?