Regulatory Enforcement and Sanctions Bill [HL]

I share the concern of the noble Baroness and my noble friend Lord Eccles over this clause because of the weakening of local authorities’ independence and freedom of action, which Clause 7 and, for that matter, some of the other provisions, including those in Clause 15, represent. I understand that in negotiating or trying to get someone to do something, it is a good idea to speak firmly and even better if you also have a big stick behind your back that the other party knows is there and that you can wave at them. Clause 7 is the big stick to follow the guidance. I was interested to read the guide to the Regulatory Enforcement and Sanctions Bill, which the Minister kindly had put in the Printed Paper Office. I was particularly interested in the sections dealing with when guidance will be given. Question 10 of the document is headed, ““What will LBRO issue guidance about?”” The answer is that it will, "““focus on issues relating to good practice in implementing the principles of better regulation””," but that it will, "““not issue guidance on technical interpretation of legislation””." It is all about good practice, apparently. Turning to Clause 7, the guide says that in relation to the power to direct a local authority to comply with the guidance on good practice, the LBRO might choose to, "““use this power where, for example, a local authority persistently acts with disregard for a particular piece of guidance and the consequences of this disregard are detrimental to businesses””." There is no mention of the consumer, just businesses. Someone with my background might be expected to approve of that aspect of it but it is interesting nevertheless. My point is that if the local authority decides—and goes on deciding and thus persistently disregards the guidance—that it wants to proceed in a particular manner which is not what the LBRO and, for that matter, the Secretary of State think is good practice, then it will be stamped on. Is that right? That is taking away from the local authority the power to regulate which it has otherwise been given by Parliament. I am not in the least surprised that the bodies which the Minister mentioned as being in support of this sort of thing should be. They are national bodies; they want uniform restrictions all over. They do not want local authorities to have independence; they want everything centrally laid down. But local authorities have no point if they have no independence. The more we take it away from them, the less point there is in having them at all. My noble friend Lady Wilcox regretted the absence of the noble Lord, Lord Jones. Of course, I share that thought, but we have the advantage in this Grand Committee of the noble Lord, Lord Bach. I urge him to think back to his extensive local government experience, and to how he would feel if he were still running a big local authority—or even a small one—and found that how he enforced legislation on businesses, shops and everything else in his area was going to be so crimped, confined and built in by national diktat, backed up by the big sticks of Clauses 7 and 15. The local authority merely has to carry it out. What is the point of being elected to carry it out if you are answerable not to the people who elected you for those responsibilities but to the LBRO and, above that, to the Secretary of State? All you can do is follow what they think is good practice, whether or not it seems to work in your particular local authority area.