Climate Change Bill [HL]

My Lords, the noble Lord has been commendably brief in moving this amendment and I shall be equally brief, if I can, in responding. I understand where the noble Lord is coming from, but there are some problems with the legal drafting of the amendment. It will bring me to my conclusion if I go through the two of them. First, at the end of the period in which the authority has been designated, the authority must already terminate its pilot scheme as the power to operate the pilot will lapse, so there is no need for a further clause to permit termination. Secondly, the power to operate the scheme is available to an authority only via an order designating it as the pilot for a fixed period or by an order applying the powers to all authorities. Either way the powers can be brought into effect only by the Secretary of State. The amendment, although seeking to bridge the gap between the two types of orders, is not legally sound, as an authority cannot use the powers without action by the Secretary of State. Despite the intention, Amendment No. 226B on its own has no practical effect. I understand that the intention is to avoid the dislocation between the pilot phase and the rollout phase. If there were a gap between the two, any authority running a pilot would temporarily have to unwind the scheme only to reinstate it, which would be confusing for residents and expensive for the council. It is a concern that we share, but we fully believe that we can manage the situation under the legislation as drafted. It is true that the situation could arise; it gives the noble Lord concern; we share that concern, but we are fairly confident that the proposed legislation will enable us to manage that situation.