Member

Turning to Amendment 67, the primary issue with subsection (7) is the lack of clarity about exactly what will be considered non-compliance under the regulations. The Secretary of State, a relevant authority or potentially any other person or body could be given the power to decide what constitutes non-compliance, without businesses knowing who is making this determination or on what grounds. For businesses to operate effectively, they need clear guidelines, as we have discussed many times, on what constitutes compliance and non-compliance. This is not just an issue of understanding the law; it is critical for businesses to be able to plan, operate and ensure safety. The vagueness of non-compliance opens the door to unpredictable and arbitrary enforcement. One critical question the Government must address is the distinction between suspected non-compliance and non-compliance. Again, what is the threshold for suspicion? The fact that the Government are introducing regulations for both these situations suggests that they believe there is a distinction, but they have not provided the clarity we seek.