My Lords, I have a question for the noble Baroness, but I confess to the fact, for the benefit of the noble Lord, Lord Razzall, that I did not make any submission to Professor Macrory; I made no input into the pre-legislative inquiries conducted before the Bill came before the House. Nor do I think that I had any obligation whatever; and nor can that be a requirement before I am allowed to address your Lordships on clauses now coming before us in a Bill. I find that a completely astonishing doctrine. Enough on that point.
My point for the noble Baroness is that I have a real problem with new subsection (4) proposed by Amendment No. 57. It states: "““Provision pursuant to subsection (2)(c)(ii) ... may include provision for other circumstances in which the regulator may not decide to impose a fixed monetary penalty””."
That seems to me to be totally unrelated to anything that I have read. Am I missing the point? Am I looking at the wrong subsection? What does it mean?
Regulatory Enforcement and Sanctions Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Neill of Bladen
(Crossbench)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 31 March 2008.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Regulatory Enforcement and Sanctions Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
700 c807-8 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 23:14:10 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_459347
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_459347
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_459347