Regulatory Enforcement and Sanctions Bill [HL]

We believe that there is a strong case for considering Amendment No. 67, which would require any voluntary agreement between a primary authority and a business to be made in writing. In practice, the LBRO is likely to establish a relationship only where it has received notification of the agreement in writing, but we accept that it might be a helpful guarantee of the local authority’s interests to ensure that this is formalised in the Bill. We want to consider the amendment in more depth and we are grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Cope, for raising it because it seems like common sense. If he is kind enough to withdraw his amendment today, we shall return to the matter on Report. Amendment No. 71 is useful in raising the procedural issues that may need to be taken into account, but we believe that the matters they raise can and will be dealt with administratively without the need for explicit statutory provision. The LBRO is obliged to maintain a register of primary authority partnerships. This is going to take the form for practical purposes of an online database to which local authorities will have routine access as a means of securing effective mutual consultation. This will be accessible to all local authorities and it will be a comparatively simple matter to decide whether there is a partnership in existence in relation to a particular business. This removes the need for a formal notification requirement on either the business or the primary authority of the sort set out in the noble Lord’s amendment. The responsibility for bringing the partnership to the attention of all the local authorities which need to be aware of it remains firmly with the LBRO, thus removing a potential burden from both the primary authority and business. The question for the enforcing authority is this: is there a primary authority in relation to the particular regulatory service? There is a clear, once-and-for-all answer in the register that the LBRO will hold. We do not believe that there will be any difficulty whatsoever for the enforcing authority—the ““local”” local authority—in checking this before it takes any action. While it may be comfortable and enjoyable to start spreading gloom about prospective confusion and muddle, this database is about as simple a system as there could be. It is not a question of the enforcing authority giving up its power; that is not how this system will work. With the greatest respect, I ask the noble Baroness whether her party is in favour of the principle authority scheme or not.