Baroness Dacres of Lewisham (Lab)

Yes, we can absolutely continue the discussion. As I said, we recognise the work that volunteers do but at the same time we do not want to make things too onerous. It has to fit right, and that is why these conversations must continue. On Amendment 338, it may be helpful if I clarify that the growth duty contained in Section 108 of the Deregulation Act 2015 does not require the ORR to prioritise economic growth over its existing responsibilities; rather, it requires the regulator to consider the impact of its decisions on economic growth when exercising specified regulatory functions. As I have mentioned, the ORR remains the independent rail safety regulator and continues to be subject to extensive statutory duties and powers in relation to rail safety. The growth duty does not override these; it sits alongside them. The ORR must continue to meet the existing statutory obligations, including its responsibility in relation to rail safety. I draw the noble Baroness’s attention to the fact that the growth duty has applied to the ORR’s safety functions since 2017 and there is no evidence that it has compromised the ORR’s approach to safety. Rather, it encourages the ORR to deliver its safety responsibilities in a way that minimises unnecessary burdens on investment and growth without affecting its ability to meet statutory safety duties. The Government’s view is that the regulator should be able to consider the impact its decisions may have on investment growth and innovation while continuing to uphold the protections and safeguards found in legislation. I therefore urge the noble Baroness not to press her amendment.