I beg to move amendment No. 105, in

clause 60, page 75, leave out lines 16 to 24.

This clause deals with the appointment of the drinking water inspectorate, and the amendment concerns the subsection in which the chief inspector of drinking water may or may not be the same for both England and Wales. The purpose is to identify what encouragements the Government have to ensure that the drinking water inspector covers both England and Wales, because there are all sorts of contradictory problems with the job. It is an important job and I welcome its inclusion in the Bill, but it would be sensible to have economies of scale and combine the jobs for one person.

If the Welsh Assembly chose to be difficult and appoint its own drinking water inspector, what financial burden would that place on it? Would there be a cost? Why do we need two people? Why could it not be the same person?

Has my hon. Friend considered the logjam that might occur in his own constituency, part of which, as we heard this morning, would come under the Welsh Assembly while the rest would not? Two inspectors who radically disagree might affect neighbours.

My hon. Friend is right, and my constituency is perhaps more vulnerable than most. However, logjams we do not get; flooding we do. Nevertheless his point was valid.

The amendment is designed to find out more about how the proposal will work, who will pay the penalty if the job is split, and what benefits that will give to consumers.

It was interesting to hear the hon. Gentleman move the amendment. The reason why Wales may require a separate inspector for drinking water is that our water tastes much better. We need somebody with the right capability to check that quality and ensure that we do not export bad quality water to England, because that would be awful.

The hon. Gentleman makes an interesting and valid point, but there is no reason why the English inspector should not be a Welshman.

Absolutely not, and the Bill allows for that. The hon. Gentleman, and the whole Conservative party, must realise that devolution has happened and is going forwards not backwards. The provision moves devolution on and should remain.

The chief inspector of drinking water is currently responsible for both England and Wales. The Bill gives statutory recognition to the chief inspector, which is a good thing. It provides for the continuation of the status quo of having one chief inspector for England and Wales, but also allows the Welsh Assembly to choose their own chief inspector. The costs for that would fall on the Assembly. That is a fair provision, which recognises the efficiency of the present system, but also the fact that, as the hon. Member for Ceredigion pointed out, devolution is a reality, and the devolved authorities should have that choice.

I am grateful to the Minister for his reply and to the hon. Member for Ceredigion for his speech. As I said at the beginning, this probing amendment was designed to find out how the system would work, and the Minister has explained that. I do not wish to push the issue because the Bill provides for the inspector to be the same person, and I hope that that will happen. The Minister has made it clear that, if the Welsh Assembly felt that it wanted somebody different, it would have to pay for it. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

I beg to move amendment No. 106, in

clause 60, page 75, line 29, leave out subsection (7).

With this it will be convenient to discuss the following amendments:

No. 287, in

clause 63, page 81, line 6, at end insert

'or such higher amount as the Secretary of State may by order determine.'.

No. 288, in

clause 64, page 81, line 12, at end insert

'or such higher amount as the Secretary of State may by order determine.'.

The amendment would delete subsection (7), which amends section 86(6) of the Water Industry Act 1991 by inserting the phrases

''on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding £20,000''

and

''on conviction on indictment, to a fine.''

I am curious as to why is it necessary to have both of those paragraphs, and the amendment is designed to find that out.