Regulatory Enforcement and Sanctions Bill [HL]

I can answer the noble Lord, Lord Borrie, very quickly. Owing to a misunderstanding with the Government Whips’ Office, it was degrouped this morning. It was grouped earlier and I thought that was still the case, but it became degrouped. It was only when I saw the final Groupings List that I realised it had been degrouped. With the leave of the Committee, I hope that I may make a short contribution to the amendments now and not move Amendment No. 19 when we come to it. The noble Lord, Lord Bach, will remember that in this Room we discussed the Regulators’ Compliance Code. I wish to quote from the first paragraph of the general introduction to the code, headed ““Purpose of the Code””. Paragraph 1.2 states: "““This Code supports the Government’s better regulation agenda and is based on the recommendations in the Hampton Report. Its purpose is to promote efficient and effective approaches to regulatory inspection and enforcement which improve regulatory outcomes without imposing unnecessary burdens on business, the Third Sector and other regulated entities””." So I cannot see why we do not have the phrase ““economically and efficiently”” in the Bill, because that is what is in the Regulators’ Compliance Code and that is what the LBRO will link with very closely, as we will see in a later clause. It is in the Hampton report; it is what Hampton said; and this is all about Hampton. I believe that the words ““efficiently”” and ““economically”” should be included in the Bill. I support the amendment moved by the noble Baroness, Lady Hamwee.