APPLICATIONS UNDER THIS PART (Hansard, 5 June 2000)

§ Mr. Timms
I beg to move, That this House agrees with the Lords in the said amendment.

§ Mr. Deputy Speaker
With this we may discuss Lords amendments Nos. 58, 74, 187, 188, 234, 235, 273, 304, 335, 372, 373, 430.

§ Mr. Timms
I will not push my luck too far: I will say a few words on this group.
50 The amendments were tabled in response to discussion in Committee and on Report in the House of Commons, where some inconsistencies were identified in the circumstances in which the Bill uses express concepts of reasonableness, for example, in relation to powers of the FSA. We have had some discussion on that point already this afternoon.
As a matter of administrative law, it is well understood that a body exercising public functions under statute must act "reasonably". That requirement will apply to the FSA, just as it does to other bodies such as the Treasury or the Secretary of State. If the FSA were to act in a way in which no reasonable authority would, that would give rise to a risk of challenge by judicial review.
Imposing express requirements for the authority to act reasonably in exercising certain powers under the Bill might therefore make little real difference in the way in which the authority was required to act under those clauses, but, at the same time, it might cast doubt on the need for the authority, or indeed other public bodies, to act reasonably in other cases where the requirement to act reasonably was not made explicit.
We have not sought to impose requirements in the Bill for the FSA to act reasonably in every particular circumstance, but we have tabled amendments to ensure that the Bill contains an express "reasonableness" element in identifying information that the authority may require a person to provide in support of an application. In such cases, it is appropriate to include such express provision because it qualifies the information that the authority can require a person to provide, as opposed to the way in which the authority is required to act.
Amendment No. 430 differs from the other reasonableness amendments only in that it concerns the powers of an appointed auditor or actuary under clause 331 to require information and explanations from the officers of an authorised person, rather than the powers of the FSA.
Amendments Nos. 187, 188, 372 and 373 amend clauses 301 and 152. At present, those clauses provide that the Director General of Fair Trading may require a person to produce documents only where they relate to a matter that is relevant to his investigation, but they do not make it clear that the same relevance test applies to a requirement to supply information. The amendments remedy that by applying the same relevance test to both documents and information.
I believe that the House will see that the Bill as thus amended is consistent in the way that I have described. I commend the amendments to the House.