Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Bill

I hope that the Committee will forgive me for intervening again briefly. There is a great deal of force in what the noble Lord, Lord Wedderburn, said. We are expressly asked to consider whether organisations can avoid their responsibility or their liability under the Bill by delegating down. I am still thinking about it, and I am not convinced that it would work. Having declared my interest as chairman of a large school, I would not feel happy if we delegated down to some low-level person within the organisation. I would not feel at all happy that we had fulfilled our duty. Questions of health and safety go right up to governing bodies, and we might find ourselves in great difficulty in court. I am not certain that those who are pressing these amendments are correct in their worries. On Amendment No. 4, I accept the rebuke from the noble and learned Lord, Lord Lloyd, for not having the case instantly at my fingertips. The case is Tesco v Nattrass. Mr Nattrass was my client on several occasions. He was a very effective trading standards officer and wonderfully litigious. That case gave a let-out to a large company if it has set up a proper system, but somebody more junior has not followed it, so long as it has reasonable control. I am not sure that we should get into all that. I would ask the Minister to think carefully about it, but I think that at the moment we should be cautious in going down that route.