My Lords, I have two very short points to make. One amplifies the points made by the noble Lord, Lord Razzall. I attended a meeting arranged by the noble Lord, Lord Bach, at which Professor Macrory was present. It was absolutely clear that he is very keen on a system of civil sanctions. When the discussion turned to how this would be implemented as a result of his report, he said very clearly that implementation was a matter not for him but for Parliament. He deliberately distanced himself from the details of the Bill, which already existed.
Secondly, do people on the tribunal know what people are talking to them about? The regulators in the list must have an incredibly wide knowledge, because there will be issues from the Charity Commission and the Hearing Aid Council to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority. The Schedule 5 designated regulators cover the waterfront, and as the House will know from debates in Committee and on day one of Report, I have always been incredibly concerned about the width of the Bill. I cannot understand why, if anyone wished to implement what they tell us is Hampton and what they believe to be Macrory, they did not choose to do so on a much more limited scale to find out how well it worked.
Regulatory Enforcement and Sanctions Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Viscount Eccles
(Conservative)
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 c809 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 23:14:04 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_459352
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_459352
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_459352