My hon. Friend the Member for Christchurch is right in saying that the additional burden specified in the regulatory impact assessment is only £88,000 for the whole of England and Wales. I expressed concern about that figure on Second Reading and in Committee. We must ensure that it is monitored carefully. It would be helpful if the Minister confirmed that it really is so low, given that it relates to an additional responsibility for staff in local authorities throughout the country who already have other responsibilities. Enforcement is key to the success of the Bill.
I do not agree with my hon. Friend the Member for Christchurch about the penalties. I think it important to provide for significant penalties that will act as a deterrent. However, my hon. Friend made a good point about the burden of proof, and about people who are not knowingly in breach of the provisions. It would also be helpful if the Minister made it clear that the £20,000 figure is a ceiling rather than a fixed penalty, and also that it will probably apply to repeat offenders only. As my hon. Friend said, it is a significant amount. We do not want genuine, responsible sunbed operators to be deterred from entering the market and operating within the legislative structure that we are creating. Some of them operate on very slim margins.
Sunbeds (Regulation) Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Mark Simmonds
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Friday, 12 March 2010.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Sunbeds (Regulation) Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
507 c554 
Session
2009-10
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 20:27:23 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_630271
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_630271
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_630271