Regulatory Enforcement and Sanctions Bill [HL]

moved Amendment No. 96: 96: Clause 28, page 12, line 34, at end insert ““LBRO or”” The noble Baroness said: I shall speak to the whole group of amendments, the first and last of which are mine. Amendment No. 96 refers to Clause 28(5), which states that, "““the primary authority must take into account any relevant recommendations relating to inspections which are published by any person (other than a local authority) pursuant to a regulatory function””." My amendment seeks to insert the word ““LBRO”” to probe whether it has a regulatory function. I do not think that that is defined and it is thus excluded from subsection (5). Amendment No. 98 is another amendment suggested by LACORS. It would insert a new clause providing for a compliance plan to broaden the scope of the suggested inspection plans. The promoters of the amendment feel that the clause as drafted has limited value in helping local authorities effectively to co-ordinate and target their enforcement activities because planned inspections, which are focused on here, form only a small part of the regulatory work that they carry out. The amendment would allow for the publication of information which was of more use to councils and would enable the regulated person to get information to all councils about their safeguard systems and, indeed, planned improvements to their operations. According to LACORS, the clause as drafted fetters the ability of authorities to be able to respond at the local level to local issues and it adds a level of bureaucracy with no ultimate impact. I beg to move.