CONSULTATION WITH BUSINESS (Hansard, 25 March 1998)

§ Mr. Ron Davies
I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.

Mr. Deputy
With this, it will be convenient to discuss amendment No. 204, in clause 64, page 31, line 33, leave out from 'consultation' to 'is' in line 34.

§ Mr. Davies
This new clause discharges the undertaking that the Under-Secretary of State for Wales, my hon. Friend the Member for Bridgend (Mr. Griffiths) gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Preseli Pembrokeshire (Ms Lawrence) on 2 March, when we debated her amendment about a scheme to sustain and promote business in Wales.
It is right that the Bill should require consultation between representatives of business and the assembly, but it should do so in a flexible way. Business will be affected by many aspects of the assembly's work, so a scheme or more rigid form of consultation would not have been practical or desirable in our view. The new clause leaves it to the assembly to judge which representatives of business it is appropriate to consult, the frequency of consultation and the matters about which there should be consultation.

§ Mr. Llew Smith (Blaenau Gwent)
I have no objection to the assembly consulting business. We have to extend the process of consultation to every aspect of our lives. What worries me is that the assembly should consult not only the shareholders but people on the shop floor or on building sites who are not generally regarded as part of the business community. I should have liked the new clause to refer to the need to consult not only business but the trade unions—the very organisations that gave birth to the Labour party that allowed the Minister to be in the privileged position that he is in today. If the trade unions are not consulted, the assembly will be consulting some business people such as the firm in my community—

Deputy Speaker
Order. The hon. Gentleman has gone over the score.

§ Mr. Davies
I welcome my hon. Friend's unequivocal support for the Government's position. He will know that, 585 in keeping with best modern European practice, the term "business" is used to describe both sides of business. To give him the assurance he seeks, the expectation is that the assembly will be required to consult both employers and the trade union movement. I was going to come to that very point, but now that my hon. Friend has raised it with me, I can delete it from my introductory remarks.
Another important flexibility is that the assembly would be able to consult business representatives not only about the prospective exercise of functions but about measures that have already been adopted by the assembly and which have had an impact on business interests. For example, having operated a particular policy for a time, the assembly could choose to review with business or trade union representatives what effect it had had, and consult them on possible changes to the policy.
I welcome the support that the hon. Member for Brecon and Radnorshire (Mr. Livsey) and his colleagues have given to the Government's proposal by putting their names to new clause 19.
Amendment No. 204 would remove the explicit reference in clause 64 to consultation with representatives of business about regulatory appraisals. The Government cannot accept the amendment. If its purpose is to prevent consultation with representatives of business under clause 64, it will fail. The clause would still require the subordinate legislation procedures to include provision for "appropriate consultation", and the standing orders could include consultation with representatives of business as part of that.
If the amendment's purpose is to make the point that there is no need to include a specific reference to consultation with representatives of business in clause 64, given the general nature of the duty in new clause 19, I have to disagree with the right hon. Member for Caernarfon (Mr. Wigley).
The specific requirement for the subordinate legislation procedures to include provision for consultation with business representatives is not limited by the general duty in the new clause. We want it to be clear that the assembly cannot avoid consulting business representatives about regulatory appraisals under clause 64 by carrying out more general consultation under new clause 19.
I am sure that new clause 19 will be warmly welcomed by business in Wales as proof of our commitment to a positive partnership between the assembly and the business sector. I ask the House to agree that the new clause be added to the Bill.

§ Mr. Jenkin
I had hoped for a grudging acknowledgement of our contribution to the new clause—[Interruption.] The Secretary of State acknowledged a contribution from a Labour Member, but I seem to remember that we had a constructive debate about appliance cost assessments and the need for the Welsh assembly to produce them when legislating.
There were exchanges in Committee about whether it was necessary to include in the Bill a requirement for compliance cost assessments. The Minister replying at the time said that legislation always provided for them, so it was not necessary to mention them specifically in the Bill. However, plenty of legislation does not provide for them because they were not in vogue when that particular 586 legislation was passed, although a reference to them would have been a useful addition. To some extent, consultation with business is a mild substitute for the requirement to carry out compliance cost assessments.

§ Mr. Ron Davies
I am sorry if I inadvertently offended the hon. Gentleman—had I done it deliberately, it would have been another matter. I mentioned my hon. Friend the Member for Preseli Pembrokeshire (Ms Lawrence) because it was her amendment that gave rise to the debate, but I fully acknowledge the support that came from all parts of the Chamber, including from those on the Opposition Front Bench, when we debated the matter.

§ Mr. Jenkin
It was extremely gracious of the Secretary of State to acknowledge that. Having said that, I shall now sour the atmosphere again with a few acidic remarks.
The problem with a new clause of this nature is that it is so general that, as we saw from the Secretary of State's exchanges with the hon. Member for Llanelli, it could be interpreted so widely.

§ Mr. Llew Smith
Blaenau Gwent.

§ Mr. Jenkin
I apologise to the hon. Gentleman.

§ Mr. Ron Davies
You had better apologise to my right hon. Friend the Member for Llanelli (Mr. Davies).

§ Mr. Jenkin
I am in a hole, but I shall not dig any deeper.
The Secretary of State serenaded the new clause and said that it was not "rigid", but that leaves a bit to be desired. Not only does it not specify the business representatives who should be consulted—every quarter of the House will have its own ideas about who those representatives should be, thus rendering the new clause almost meaningless—but the Secretary of State compounded the error by going on to talk about "both sides of business". In fact, the modem idea is that we do not divide business into sides. Employers and shareholders should be treated as a single unit, working harmoniously and co-operatively together for the benefit of the business, its customers and the community as a whole.
However, it would be churlish of us not to welcome the new clause. As I said, it is not a proper substitute for compliance cost assessments, which is what business really wants. Business wants a clear explanation of the costs and benefits of particular legislation and how it will impact on its affairs in particular, and on business in general.
It is too easy for legislators—we are setting up another body of legislators—to have good ideas which can prove hugely costly to the people on the ground who have to implement them. We are already living in an over-regulated society, and I fear that new clause 19 will not protect business from the tendency of legislators to over-regulate.
As for amendment No. 204 tabled by Plaid Cymru, I am at a loss to know why that party wishes to delete any obligation to consult businesses on the particular issue of subordinate legislation, because it seems that that is the very point at which an input from business should be most valuable. After all, it is business that ultimately generates 587 the wealth that will pay the taxes that will fund the activities of the Welsh assembly. If the assembly cannot even curtsey in the direction of business when it is legislating, there ain't much hope for the way the assembly is going to function for the benefit of Wales.
One would hope that such invocations would not be necessary if the assembly were doing its job properly. I wonder whether the new clause is really an expression of faith in the assembly, or an anticipation by the Secretary of State of the assembly's shortcomings.

§ Mr. Ieuan Wyn Jones (Ynys Môn)
I am grateful to the Secretary of State and to the hon. Member for North Essex (Mr. Jenkin) for telling the House the purpose of amendment No. 204 before we had even spoken to it. I can now deal with their opposition to it, instead of putting my positive arguments.
Let me make it clear at the outset that it is not our intention specifically to remove the assembly's obligation to consult business. It is a probing amendment. Under clause 64, there is an obligation on the assembly to consult business but no one else. It refers to "appropriate consultation" being carried out, but what does that mean? Consultation with whom, and with what sorts of organisations? The only clarity in the clause is that business must be consulted; there is no obligation to consult anyone else.
The amendment aims to probe what sort of organisations it is expected that the assembly will consult. For example, will it consult voluntary organisations?
If the assembly is considering subordinate legislation that affects nursery education, would it have to consult, let us say, Mudiad Ysgolion Meithrin—the Pre-school Playgroups Association Wales—or not? One might read the Bill and say it might do so, "if appropriate", but the assembly might consider it not appropriate to do so. However, even on nursery education, it would have to consult business.
With the amendment, we are seeking clarity. Unfortunately, the Bill as it stands provides clarity in respect of one particular section of society, but not others. That is not to say, as the Secretary of State has stressed, that business would not be consulted; but we want to know what other organisations should be consulted. The danger in legislation is always that, if we begin to list, we either list the lot or we list nobody. That is why we tabled the amendment.
8 pm
The hon. Member for North Essex knows perfectly well that we support new clause 19 as drafted. I put it on record that there is no question of Plaid Cymru saying that business should not be consulted. However, let me make a point that even the hon. Gentleman did not make.
The Secretary of State has said that business in the modern sense includes both business organisations in the traditional sense and trade unions. We welcome that assurance, but I hope that business in Wales does not simply mean the CBI, either. We want an assurance that business in that sense means business in the widest sense.
The vast majority of employers in my constituency are self-employed people who run small businesses, and it has been announced in the past few weeks that an organisation that represents such businesses—the Federation of Smal 588 Businesses—is, in preparation for the setting up of the assembly, establishing a Welsh organisation; it is to be congratulated on that creditable action. Will the Secretary of State give an assurance that there will be an obligation under the terms of the new clause for the assembly to consult the Federation of Small Businesses?

§ Mr. Llew Smith
My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has already stated that he is willing to include trade unions in his definition of business, but let us assume that the assembly takes some initiative in relation to the environment, and that it decides that it is necessary to consult business. Does the hon. Gentleman believe that the assembly should also be under an obligation to consult the local community, who may be affected by business or believe that their area has been polluted by business? They may feel that they have no voice if their role is not specified in the legislation.

§ Mr. Jones
I must confess that I strongly agree with those sentiments. The assembly should consult to the widest possible extent—hon. Members on both sides of the House would agree on that point. We are asking the Secretary of State, in a probing way, to give an assurance that, through clauses 64 and new clause 19, there will be an obligation on the assembly to consult. If he gives that assurance, we will be satisfied; otherwise, the questions marks will remain.

§ Mr. Denzil Davies
Perhaps to his surprise, I agree with much of what the hon. Member for Ynys Môn (Mr. Jones) says. I welcome the new clause as far as it goes, although I was surprised to hear my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State overturn 500 years of case law by suggesting that "business" included trade unions. I do not know whether the Lord Chancellor will want to have a word with him tomorrow about that legal interpretation, but we shall leave that point for now. I understand business to mean business, but there is nothing wrong with the new clause for that.
We tend to be rather romantic about the Welsh assembly, so by all means let us consult business. Business is important, because the main challenge facing the assembly will be to try to raise the level of gross domestic product in Wales, which has fallen dangerously low, especially in the western part of Wales, both north-west and south-west. Perhaps the challenge will not be to raise, but merely to sustain, the abysmally low level of GDP, given the pressures that may be exerted on the Welsh economy over the next few years.
However, the assembly is not about business—it is about doling out money. The assembly is about spending £7 billion, almost all of which will not go to business or anywhere near it. About £200 million gross will be the budget of the new-style Welsh Development Agency, but the net figure will probably be less, because the agency will have to find some of its budget from its internal organisation. Therefore, we are not talking about large sums of money.
The assembly is there to distribute money for social purposes, which has to be done—we need a health service and education—so the larger part of the work of the assembly will not be about business. The new clause is welcome for that reason, because it can make it clear to the assembly that business exists, and that business is as important as handing out money. What worries me is that the whole orientation of the Bill is not in that direction.
589 One of the clauses not debated—clause 112, which has already been mentioned—deals with voluntary organisations in Wales and enables the assembly to set up a scheme to assist voluntary organisations. Such organisations are defined extremely strangely as organisations that do not have to make a profit, but exist to benefit the whole or any part of Wales".
I cannot think of any definition wider, more diffuse or more dangerous in some ways than that. The whole thrust of the legislation is that money is to be spent on non-business matters and on organisations that will not create wealth. Trade unions and employees are part of the wealth-creating process.
I rose to speak in this debate because a constituent who has a master's in business administration wrote to me enclosing the Labour party's person specification for candidates for the assembly. I am sure that the hon. Member for Montgomeryshire (Mr. Öpik) will jump, because understands the magical language that includes such phrases. The person specification I was sent seeks, rightly, "Labour party experience". In another phrase that the hon. Gentleman will recognise, it also seeks "life experiences".

§ Mr. Öpik
Before the right hon. Gentleman proceeds, let me categorically state that I have not been moonlighting on behalf of the Labour party in any management consultancy context in respect of its selection procedures.

§ Mr. Davies
From what I know of management consultants, that is a great relief.
The person specification calls for "Other life experience". I am not quite sure how one is to read those words—whether the experience desired is of the other life or of another life outside the Labour party, although I suspect it is the latter. I am concerned because, during the referendum campaign, great emphasis was placed, quite rightly, on the fact that the assembly would be an assembly for business as well as for the rather old-fashioned councillors from south Wales; but when I read the person specification's suggestions of what constitutes other life experience, I saw no mention of business at all.
We note that Family and other caring responsibilities are considered to be other life experience for the purposes of sitting in the Welsh assembly. I suppose one could consider "work/professional" to mean business, but the suggestions go on to cover "educational" experience and "Voluntary sector experience", neither of which involves business—quite the opposite. Appearing next are "tenants groups", which are certainly not business; "youthwork", which might possibly be related to business; and community involvement, PTA, charity work", which are not. Those are followed by "campaigning experience", whatever that may mean. Then there is Public service experience … local government, trade union". My hon. Friend the Member for Blaenau Gwent (Mr. Smith) will be pleased to learn that the trade unions come under the heading of "Other life experience", 590 but there is nothing about business. The category ends with "magistrate, school governorship", which again have nothing to do with business. No doubt the Liberals have a similar classification, taken from a similar management consultancy booklet or whatever. However, I am sorry to say that there is nothing in the Labour party person specification about business. No suggestion is made that part of the "Other life experience" should be business.
I welcome the new clause, because at least it tries to make it clear that the £7 billion ultimately comes from business. I do not want to upset my hon. Friend the Member for Blaenau Gwent, so I shall define business in the novel way used by the Secretary of State, including trade unions, shareholders and employees. All those people create the wealth.
I hope that the assembly will pay attention to a clause such as new clause 19, because, if we do not have that wealth creation in Wales, however much money or subsidy comes to Wales from the United Kingdom Treasury, or from Europe—there will probably be less of it in the next few years—the other activities will suffer. We must place an emphasis on business.
I am sorry that the Labour party appears to have ignored business completely in its person specification, but at least we are making up for that to some extent in the new clause.

§ Mr. Öpik
I congratulate the right hon. Member for Llanelli (Mr. Davies), who is obviously a key player in the ball park, and who is absolutely right to run the idea up the flagpole and see if anyone salutes—classic phrases from the books he describes.
Four of the five hon. Members who tabled new clause 19 are Liberal Democrats, because we unequivocally support the Bill. In earlier debates, some hon. Members have feared comparisons with business, which is fair enough, but when I think of the word "business", I think not only of the big companies but of the smaller companies and of the individuals who form 30 per cent. of business people in areas such as mid-Wales.
The Federation of Conservative—oh dear, a blast from the past. Let me say that again. The Federation of Small Businesses would very much corroborate the importance of small business in Wales. At the moment, sadly, especially in mid-Wales, rural areas are suffering a deep recession. I mean not just the closure of larger companies, such as D. C. Evans, but the terrible cash flow problems that are being experienced by farmers, who are small business people. They feel fed up and let down by the current Government, as they felt fed up and let down by the Government who preceded them. An assembly is their best hope for a medium-term reprieve from the suffocation that they experience—in their view, due to insensitive handling of rural issues by both Governments.
The assembly, by listening and using its powers, can definitely make a difference to the quality of life and, more to the point, the economic performance of Wales as a whole and the rural areas in particular.
We have made this criticism previously, so I shall not dwell on it, but it is a matter of regret to Liberal Democrats that the assembly will not have more powers to influence the economic development of Wales. Nevertheless, it will have an important role in lobbying the Secretary of State for Wales and the Westminster Parliament, to ensure that Wales's voice is heard.
591 We all agreed with the hon. Member for Merthyr Tydfil and Rhymney (Mr. Rowlands) that politics is not a business—not simply a question of pounds and pence. However, the voice of business is the voice of the working people. When we remember that business is not just LG, Laura Ashley and Control Techniques, but Peter Burt the publican, Nick Bates the farmer and Neil Badger the photographer, business takes on the face and personality of the people who keep Wales trading.
We believe that politicians can learn from business people, just as business people can gain an immense amount by becoming aware of the social environment in which they trade. That is why we warmly welcome new clause 19.

§ Ms Jackie Lawrence (Preseli Pembrokeshire)
Because it was I who requested that the business issue be raised in the context of the assembly, I was stunned by the comments of the hon. Member for North Essex (Mr. Jenkin), who first tried to claim credit for raising the issue and then said that he regarded the new clause as almost useless. There is considerable confusion on the Conservative Benches as to how the Opposition stand on that issue.
I very much welcome the fact that the Secretary of State wishes new clause 19 to be incorporated in the Bill, because it is a sign of a determination in the assembly to have a framework of wholesale co-operation between all sectors of society and all the people of Wales.
The hon. Member for Ynys Môn (Mr. Jones) asked, "Why just business?" but the Bill already contains a system for consultation of the voluntary sector. We also have a system, through the Partnership Council for Wales, for consultation on educational matters. It was for that reason that I first raised the issue of consultation with business. At that stage, although there was an innovative approach for a reactive consultation with business, I felt that it should be proactive, not only to obtain benefits on compliance costs, as the Opposition said, but to give the assembly the very positive and pragmatic benefits of business sector expertise.
It is vital that small businesses are represented in the consultative process, especially in the light of the fact that a recent European Commission report says that new jobs are most likely to come from small businesses. Those businesses need the means to communicate effectively with the assembly to maximise job creation.
8.15 pm
It is important to consult business. I have just returned from Catalonia, which has a 20-year record of devolution. The enthusiasm demonstrated there, the co-operation between all sectors in the region, and the confidence arising from that, which has enabled people to portray what their area has to offer, were very welcome.
My right hon. Friend the Member for Llanelli (Mr. Davies) said something about the assembly doing little more than doling out money. My vision, and the reason that I wanted business to be consulted, is that the purpose of the assembly is to give the Welsh people democratic control of things that affect their everyday lives. That goes for everyone in Wales—and for the businesses in Wales, to which we look for our economic future.

§ Mr. John Smith (Vale of Glamorgan)
I shall speak briefly but warmly in support of new clause 19. I congratulate my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State on presenting the new clause, because it strikes exactly the right note in terms of the relationship between the new assembly and business in Wales. I also congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Preseli Pembrokeshire (Ms Lawrence) on bringing the matter to the notice of the House by tabling her new clause 14 in Committee. She rightly withdrew that new clause for what is now a better clause and a better piece of legislation.
I spoke in support of new clause 14 in Committee, but with a note of caution, based on my experience of more than five years, from 1992 to 1997, working with one of the biggest partnerships between private business, Government and Government agencies in Wales. It was one of the most successful partnerships in contributing to, and attracting, inward investment to Wales. We attracted a higher proportion of inward investment to that part of Wales during that period than any other region and, by and large, it was due to that relationship.
However, one cannot legislate a formula, which is why new clause 19 is so good. One cannot embody in law what that partnership with business should be. It is my passionate belief that the secret of a successful relationship between Government and business is to evolve an innovative relationship, which does not try to get either partner to do what it cannot do. It allows each partner to do what it does best, without interference. That was the secret of our experience, and I think that it is the secret for future success in Wales.
My right hon. Friend the Member for Llanelli (Mr. Davies) is right when he says that the greatest problem facing the new assembly will be gross domestic product per capita in Wales, which is in relative decline when compared to GDP in the rest of the United Kingdom. If we do not address that problem by working in partnership with the wealth creators, with business in Wales, we shall certainly have a problem.

§ Mr. Llew Smith
Does my hon. Friend accept that there is a need to include the word "business" in the Bill, in the sense that there is a need to consult business? Does he accept also that, within the proposed legislation, we should have included a reference to local communities, which may have been adversely affected as a result of the activities of business? For example, if a firm is set up in a community and as a result that community is polluted, the assembly would have an obligation to consult the firm, or the polluter, but not the local community that has been polluted by the activities of the firm. Should we not extend the list of those who should be consulted?

§ Mr. Smith
I understand that there is a commitment to sustainable development. My hon. Friend is absolutely right. We must consult and we must protect people, but that should be done under a separate mechanism. The challenge facing us is the future success of Welsh business.
Those who cast doubts on the ability of the Welsh people and the Welsh assembly to work in partnership with business should re-examine the track record of local government in Wales and its success in partnership with business. Local government and business worked together as a team. We in Wales are better able and better prepared 593 than others, partly because of our co-operative values, to work closely in partnership with business and to make a damned good success of that approach. We have done so in the past despite, on occasions, the activities of some Tory Secretaries of State for Wales over the past 10 years, who have done business in Wales no favours. Local government in partnership with business has been responsible for our success in attracting foreign investment, I stress, into Wales.

§ Mr. Llew Smith
I accept that the proposed legislation may be committed to sustainable development, but will my hon. Friend accept that, even allowing for that, it is likely that some firms in Wales will continue to pollute communities? Perhaps there should be written into the Bill an obligation that consultation should take place with those who are being polluted by particular firms.

§ Mr. Smith
I think that that should be covered generally by environmental protection legislation. I think also that my hon. Friend's argument detracts slightly from the new clause, which I wish to address.

§ Ms Lawrence
My hon. Friend the hon. Member for Blaenau Gwent (Mr. Smith) has been an advocate of strong local government. Do we not agree that the avenue for tackling issues such as the pollution of communities where such communities have a direct input is through strong local government? The assembly will strengthen local government to allow that to happen.

§ Mr. Smith
I agree absolutely with my hon. Friend.
Finally, the clause is exactly what we want to see. The answer is to have a broad framework of bodies to consult and to have a dialogue with business in Wales. In the end, the secret will be for business to make its own contribution to the success of the Welsh economy by forming private sector-led partnerships that are broadly coterminous with the new regional committees that will be set up by the Welsh assembly. I welcome the new clause.

§ Mr. Ron Davies
I thank all those who have expressed their support for the new clause. I shall concentrate on the points raised by the hon. Member for Ynys Môn (Mr. Jones). I ask for his forgiveness if he thinks that I was rather precipitate in explaining his new clause before he introduced it. However, the hon. Gentleman asked me a number of questions and I shall respond to them. That will give me the opportunity to respond also to the points raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Blaenau Gwent (Mr. Smith).
First, the hon. Member for Ynys Môn raised the problem that is inherent in a new clause of the sort that is before us. The hon. Gentleman described it as the problem of listing. It is true that, once we start to place an obligation on a body such as the assembly to consult one group, it may well be asked why it should not consult other groups. The hon. Gentleman referred specifically to the voluntary sector. I draw his attention to clauses 111 and 112, which set out the mechanism by which the assembly can establish good relations both with local government and the voluntary sector. Clause 112 refers specifically to a relationship with voluntary organizations.
594 I again congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Preseli Pembrokeshire (Ms Lawrence) on introducing her amendment in Committee. My hon. Friend's answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Blaenau Gwent was absolutely correct. It is local government that will—

§ Mr. Llew Smith
Will my right hon. Friend give way?

§ Mr. Davies
No, I am sorry. I have to put my case. I cannot give way at the moment. If I have time, I shall give way.
My hon. Friend raised a fair point, and I understand his argument. However, my hon. Friend the Member for Preseli Pembrokeshire was right when she said that it is for local government to represent communities. We have set out in clause 111 how we see relations with local government developing.
The hon. Member for Ynys Môn referred to the Federation of Small Businesses, and asked whether our definitions would include the federation. He will be interested to know that the federation, along with the Institute of Directors and the Confederation of British Industry, made a formal submission to the Welsh Office. They are content with the form of words that we have used. As I said in my opening remarks, we believe that it is right to leave it to the assembly to judge which representatives of business it is appropriate for it to consult.
No doubt there will be changes over time, and I certainly do not want to be too prescriptive at this moment and place a legal obligation on the assembly which might cause it difficulties in future. It is right, therefore, to place a duty but to give maximum discretion to the assembly to develop the duty as it thinks best.
The hon. Member for Ynys Môn referred to the provisions that are set out in clause 64, which deals with consultation on regulatory appraisals. The clause provides that there should be procedures for "appropriate consultation" where the costs … of complying with the assembly's subordinate legislation are likely to be significant". The consultation that will be appropriate in those circumstances will vary from case to case. It could include, under clause 64, consultation with, for example, the voluntary sector, charities, local authorities and environmental groups. That is providing some redress in terms of the point raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Blaenau Gwent.
It must be right that the assembly tailors its consultation to meet the prevailing circumstances. The circumstances will obviously change from case to case. If the assembly failed to consult in a way that would be reasonable, that would increase the risk that it might be subject to challenge by way of judicial review for failing to comply with its duty under clause 64. I hope that hon. Members are reassured, and that the new clause will not be pressed to a vote.
Question put and agreed to.
Clause read a Second time, and added to the Bill.