Mr Laurence Robertson (Shadow Minister, Economic Affairs; Tewkesbury, Conservative)

I beg to move amendment No. 42, in clause 54, page 44, line 34, at end insert

', who shall have the power to order that the statement of policy shall be amended if he is not satisfied with it.'.

Clause 54 concerns a statement of policy in relation to civil penalties, which the OFT is obliged to publish. Proposed new section 39C(3) in the 1974 Act says:

''No statement of policy shall be published without the approval of the Secretary of State.''

My amendment is partly a probing amendment, although not entirely. I want to test what exactly subsection (3) means. Does it mean that the Secretary of State must be satisfied with the details of that statement? I would be happy if that were the case, because hon. Members will recall that I have just once or twice been slightly critical of the OFT and the extra powers it will gain. I am happy for the Secretary of State to be required to approve the statement before it is published. That is the probing part, to which I would like an answer.

My amendment, however, goes a little bit further and clarifies subsection (3) if that is not to be the case. It gives the Secretary of State the power to order that the statement of policy be amended if he is not satisfied—in other words, to avoid getting to the point at which he is not satisfied and then nothing seeming to happen from there on.

That is important, because the OFT's imposition of civil penalties is a serious matter. It may turn out that the OFT is too heavy handed in the way in which it imposes penalties, or it may turn out that it is not heavy handed enough. At some point, the Secretary of State should be able to affect that. I will not go over the horse racing analogy, which hon. Members had to sit through on Tuesday, in which the Secretary of State could not intervene or make any particular difference. However, with a body as powerful as the OFT, the Secretary of State should have some ability to affect what it does. When I say the Secretary of State, I mean that Parliament should have an ability to affect what the OFT does. I would like an explanation of that.

May I test your patience just for one minute, Mr. Benton? This is the final clause that relates directly to the OFT. I remain concerned by the OFT's power, and   by Parliament's lack of ability to affect what it does. The Minister has said that the OFT frequently appears in front of Select Committees, but we all know that Select Committees do not have any power to affect what the OFT does. They can produce a damning report, and that may or may not happen in the future, but I remain concerned by the lack of parliamentary control over the OFT and by hon. Members' lack of ability to represent their constituents with regard to the way in which the OFT works. I would like to put that on the record. The Bill has added to my concerns in many ways, and I have gone through those concerns in great detail. I will not repeat them now, but I do want to say that I am very concerned about it indeed.

Mr Gerry Sutcliffe (Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Employment Relations, Competition and Consumers), Department of Trade and Industry; Bradford South, Labour)

I recognise the problems that the hon. Member for Tewkesbury has had with the OFT, not least the issue around the racing analogy. Cheltenham racecourse is in the hon. Gentleman's constituency, and that clearly could have had an impact on his constituents. I understand his view of the OFT, but I have tried to explain some of the safeguards that are in place that relate to the OFT and its powers, how it reports and how it is accountable to Parliament.

With regard to amendment No. 42, I agree that the Secretary of State should have some control over the statement of policy on civil penalties. The statement of policy will set out details of the circumstances in which the OFT would impose civil penalties and would set out the level of civil penalties. It is right that the Secretary of State should approve a policy statement before it is published, and that is exactly what clause 54 ensures, stating that no statement of policy should be published without the approval of the Secretary of State. In the unlikely event of the Secretary of State's not approving the policy statement, and if the OFT does not make amendments to it, the statement could not be published. Until a statement is published the OFT cannot impose civil penalties on licensees. Therefore the clause offers an additional safeguard. Having been given that assurance, the hon. Gentleman will, I hope, withdraw the amendment.

Mr Laurence Robertson (Shadow Minister, Economic Affairs; Tewkesbury, Conservative)

With the Minister's—I almost said ''Secretary of State's'', although I am sure that that is only one reshuffle away if a general election does not intervene—very clear explanation of how the clause will work, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause 54 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Further consideration adjourned.—[Mr. Watson.]

Adjourned accordingly at Six minutes past Eleven o'clock till this day at half-past Two o'clock.