Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Bill [HL]

I do not—but that does not mean there have not been any. I shall find out and let the noble Lord know. I am sure that it will influence which way he decides to move on this question. Moving on from certification and my explanation of why we have done it in this way—noble Lords may want to think about the position of court employees and the private industry—Amendment No. 104 relates to the bigger question, which noble Lords were right to raise, of what was said originally about moving to regulation. Although I am not yet in a position to say too much about it, I am very mindful of the commitments the Government have made and of our desire to look at the matter appropriately. We need to consider the position of the vulnerable people who have been widely described in the debate, but also make sure that we support the industry appropriately. As I said, I have had very good meetings with the industry and I have made it clear that I want to talk to its representatives. I will talk, of course, to noble Lords in particular about the most appropriate vehicle whereby we might take this matter forward. They have been extremely helpful, not least in saying that they see this as a self-financing exercise, which is always a good position for government. But I need to think very carefully. I have already had a meeting with my colleague Vernon Coaker, the Minister at the Home Office, to consider how we might take this matter forward. I am very mindful of the issues. We need to think about it and consult more widely and, if noble Lords will allow me, between now and Report that is precisely what I will do. I shall talk to noble Lords before I bring anything forward at that stage. Amendment No. 105 seeks to change ““may”” to ““shall””. The trouble is, we need to change it from ““may”” to ““must”” in this legislation because every ““may”” becomes a ““must””. Although I accept the amendment in principle, it needs to be ““must”” and not ““shall””. I am sure we can find a way of doing that between us. Of course we will produce the regulations. I am perfectly happy to say ““must”” but I cannot say ““shall””, apparently, on this issue. On Amendment No. 106, I do not think we need extra requirements in the certification process. We have set out a great deal of what we are going to do in paragraph 185 of the policy statement on page 30. As to some of the specific requirements, the provision of information to debtors is already contained in paragraphs 7 and 28 of Schedule 12. We have discussed information being provided for the reasons that noble Lords have raised. I do not think prescribing insurance requirements is practical for individual agents because bailiff companies employ many different agents. That is the difficulty I have with that proposal. In any case, they have to provide bonds as part of the certification process which can be used to pay compensation to debtors who successfully complain about their actions. Again, paragraph 185 of the policy statement will give noble Lords a little more detail. Amendment No. 107 in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Lucas, is tied to Amendments Nos. 99 to 102. In a sense, it seeks to provide exemptions to the earlier amendments exempting certain kinds of agents. I am trying to think through how we may deal with this in a more consistent way. Amendment No. 108 relates to the provision of a code of practice. We need to talk to the industry about that. Such codes are very important when seeking to develop our relationship with industry and in thinking through certification and regulation. They are part of that debate, so I would want to have the discussion in that context. Amendment No. 109 would regulate by order all those subject to certification and there is a proposal that that should be by an affirmative resolution. I always do what the Delegated Powers Committee tells me to do. When it does not tell me to do things, knowing how diligent it is, I tend to think that I have probably got the matter right. That is my position on that. We will see what progress we make in further discussions with the industry, colleagues in other departments and noble Lords. I hope that shows that I am very mindful of what we have said previously and am looking at what further we might do. I plan to announce any arrangements in that direction on Report. I am also looking at issues to do with codes of practice and how we can work more effectively with industry. I hope that addresses, at least in part, noble Lords’ concerns.