Debates between Lord Stoneham of Droxford and Lord Cope of Berkeley during the 2015-2017 Parliament

Enterprise Bill [HL]

Debate between Lord Stoneham of Droxford and Lord Cope of Berkeley
Wednesday 25th November 2015

(9 years, 1 month ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Lord Stoneham of Droxford Portrait Lord Stoneham of Droxford (LD)
- Hansard - -

Amendment 11 would give additional power to the commissioner to recommend to the Secretary of State a fine when a large business has been subjected to repeated complaints and has refused to make changes recommended by the commissioner. We asked in Committee and I ask again: what will happen without some form of sanction for repeat offenders? We believe that this is necessary to give some power to the commissioner and provide a deterrent to those who refuse to co-operate with his work. We think that it could be set up by regulation and that it is important to give some authority to the body. I beg to move.

Lord Cope of Berkeley Portrait Lord Cope of Berkeley
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, there are two amendments in this group. As the noble Lord has just explained, the first is about a persistent offender or repeated complaints, and it proposes a fine. The way that the fine is introduced is very unusual in comparison with most times when we introduce a fine into statute. I do not so much complain about that—it is perhaps a drafting matter—but there it is.

Amendment 15 would give very wide powers to the Secretary of State, on the advice of the commissioner, to make an enormous number of very complicated regulations—also leading, incidentally, to a fine if they are not complied with. That is the wrong thing to do, certainly at this point in the development of the Small Business Commissioner role. As we said earlier, he or she should focus on the issue of late payment, and introducing all this machinery changes the nature of what is happening. I do not support Amendment 15 in particular.