Regulatory Enforcement and Sanctions Bill [HL]

I hope the noble Lord does not mind me saying so too. My noble friend has it just right. There is a danger of giving an inch. The noble Lord can be forgiven for relying on the same argument to go just a little further, but there is a difference here. Amendment No. 20 adds further criteria to the LBRO’s objectives. A number of amendments have been laid to the Bill seeking to alter the objective, and I will take this opportunity to explain why the LBRO has been given its objective as drafted in Clause 5. Under Clause 5, the LBRO is required to secure that local authorities exercise their relevant functions in a way that is effective, does not give rise to unnecessary burdens and complies with the five principles of better regulation. Those principles of good regulation were first set out by the Better Regulation Task Force, chaired by the noble Lord, Lord Haskins, in 1997. They have stood the test of time pretty well and are increasingly being integrated into the legislative framework for regulators. They also feature in Ofcom’s founding legislation, for instance, and many regulators are required to have regard to them under the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Act 2006. It is essential that the principles of better regulation are embedded at the local level, and it is appropriate for the LBRO to take on the task of achieving that. In addition, it is vital that the LBRO secures that local authorities carry out their functions in a way that reduces regulatory burdens and is effective; that is, in a way that reduces those burdens without compromising regulatory outcomes or the valuable protections that regulations provide. On Amendment No. 20, we are utterly confident that the LBRO will look to promote proactiveness and positivity on the part of local authorities but do not believe that that should be added to the objective. There is a risk, in statute, of overloading the LBRO with multiple objectives; that should be avoided to reduce the possibility of unnecessary confusion. The noble Lord’s amendment is just a step too far.