§
Amendment proposed: No. 44, in page 81, line 3 leave out ' the payment of ' and insert—
'such particulars as the agency may reasonably require to enable them to identify the file, and'.—[Mr. Alan Williams.]
§ Mr. ChannonIt has been pointed out to me that we have an alternative amendment, No. 45, and that, although the Government's amendment is a step forward, it does not go far enough to meet the reasonable requirements of those who will have to operate this new section of the Bill. If one is asked to provide details about a "Mr. A. Williams", it is surely much clearer if one can be told exactly who the person is whose name and address or addresses are given in the notice, so that it is known exactly about whom one is asked to provide the information.
The Government's amendment uses the words
such particulars as the agency may reasonably require to enable them to identify the file".901 There is still, however, considerable worry that this would still put them under a very onerous duty to look at all the files of people who may live miles away. "Mr. A. William" may live in Glasgow rather than London.Amendment No. 45 is an alternative and would make it much clearer. It would not weaken any protection for the consumer; it would probably help the consumer if it were known exactly about whom one was making inquiries rather than about some amorphous group of people. The Government's amendment would still lead to that situation.
Mr. Alan WilliamsI looked at the hon. Gentleman's amendment, obviously, as we had one working to a similar objective. I know that we both want to resolve the problem which faces the agencies particularly. In our part of the world, Mr. Deputy Speaker, where the names are often coincidental, a large number of people with similar names have similar initials. However, we have looked at the two options, but we feel that the amendment put forward by the hon. Gentleman would dilute the concept of the file too much and could lead to too many escape routes for agencies. Our amendment should meet the requirements because we "reasonably require" to enable them to identify the file. On the instance that the hon. Gentleman put forward of a "Mr. A. Williams" in Glasgow and a "Mr. A. Williams" in London, I should think it would be of some relevance if Mr. A. Williams had neglected to mention that he also had a Glasgow address.
It seems that our use of the term "reasonably" would cover the agencies. The concession that we have made—perhaps not a concession—the modification that we have made as a result of representations we have received is such that most of the requirements of the agencies have been met where both sides would agree that there is a reasonable point. But I cannot urge the House to accept the amendment put forward by the hon. Gentleman.
May I thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, for your help in speeding the proceedings today and for removing a major headache from my hon. Friends and me, with all the amendments that we had ahead of us. 902 I should like to feel that it was somewhat out of regard for the proceedings of the House. In Welsh Grand Committee, and so on, we have been in debate, fortunately on the same side, so often together Mr. Deputy Speaker, that I suspect that it is that you are now so impressed with the potential length of my speeches that you would resort to almost any procedural device to avoid that.
§ Mr. ChannonI hope that the hon. Gentleman is right. I still have worries that what is proposed will not be "reasonable", but we shall now have to await the outcome. If there are serious representations after the passage of the Bill, I hope that the Government will be prepared to look at them. However, I do not wish to press Amendment No. 45.
§ Amendment agreed to.