HL Deb 06 March 1989 vol 504 cc1259-60

2.53 p.m.

Lord Allen of Abbeydale asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether they will introduce legislation to amend the development risks defence in the Consumer Protection Act 1987 now that the EC Commission is beginning proceedings against them for failure properly to implement the relevant directive.

Lord Young of Graffham

My Lords, there are no plans to amend the Act. We remain of the view that the directive has been properly implemented and that the present wording of Section 4(1)(e) of the Consumer Protection Act interprets the meaning of the directive with greater clarity. No formal notification of proceedings has been received from the Commission: when we do receive notification we shall of course consider it carefully.

Lord Allen of Abbeydale

My Lords, I wish to thank the Secretary of State for that Answer, unsatisfactory though it is. Does the noble Lord recall that the House amended the relevant clause of the Consumer Protection Bill so as to make it conform to the directive? However, in another place right at the end of the Session and after a brief discussion the wording was restored against which we are told that proceedings are now to be instituted by the Commission. Could not the Government admit that in the hurry they got it wrong? Were they to do so they could avoid a prolonged period of uncertainty which is only too likely to end in another defeat in the European Court.

Lord Young of Graffham

My Lords, I think that we should put this into perspective, because it applies to so much of our record within the European Community. When the Commission issued the directive, we were the first nation in the Community to implement it. When before Christmas—no doubt as part of its housekeeping—the Commission issued a press release confirming that proceedings were to be taken against 11 of the 12 member states, for nine of those 11 it was for not implementing the directive at all. It is said that the Commission may well take proceedings against us because of the way in which we implement it.

However, our position is quite clear; we believe that we implement it fairly and in a way which is effective. I think that we should wait to find out—if and when the Commission comes to us—precisely what the complaint is about the way in which we implement the directive.

Baroness Burton of Coventry

My Lords, although the Secretary of State was not the Minister responsible at the time, does he recall that we are discussing an amendment of mine which was passed by this House two years ago on 9th March 1987? It was subseqently removed by the Government. I protested strongly at the time along similar lines to those on which the EC Commission is now protesting.

Further, does the Minister recall that at Question Time on 29th October, when I asked him whether he would have a word with the then Leader of the House, the noble Viscount, Lord Whitelaw, about the background to the whole matter, he gave me what I can only call a most contemptuous Answer? I took strong exception to his attitude.

Lord Young of Graffham

My Lords, I am very sorry if I offended the noble Baroness in any way. I cannot recall doing so and I shall have to consult the record to find out whether I did. It is not my way to be contemptuous of anyone in your Lordships' House.

I fear that the Government remain convinced that the defence we adopted in the Bill is the only one which would avoid stifling innovation. I suggest that we all wait to see the precise complaint from the Commission. At the moment this is the situation. We know no more than that a press release was issued before last Christmas by the Commission. That was at the time of the previous Commissioner. If the Commission is going to take steps no doubt it will do so in due course. But first, of course, it should take steps against the nine of the member nations who have not implemented the directive at all.

Lord Williams of Elvel

My Lords, I am sure that the noble Lord will agree that uncertainty of all kinds should be removed. Will he accept the offer from the Opposition that when the Government admit that they are wrong and produce a Bill to amend the Act, in order to fulfil the Council directive—not the Commission directive—we in the Opposition shall give it a very fair wind?

Lord Young of Graffham

My Lords, I am very grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Williams of Elvel, who is most helpful, as ever.

Lord Allen of Abbeydale

My Lords, is the Secretary of State aware that the Commission has two other grounds on which it believes that the Act does not implement the directive? Is it his intention to brave it out on those two grounds as well?

Lord Young of Graffham

My Lords, I think that the first step should be for the Commission to tell us in what respects it is not happy with the Act. I look forward to receiving a communication from the Commission rather than just a press release.