moved Amendment No. 4:
4: Clause 2, page 2, line 25, at end insert—
““( ) a ““consumer”” includes a person who purchases, uses or receives goods or services for the purpose of their own business;””
The noble Lord said: I return to this amendment following Committee, in part because I am still not wholly satisfied with the Minister’s answer, and in part because I believe that getting sole traders and small businesses involved in the context of the National Consumer Council will be a huge challenge. That challenge should be addressed by the provisions of the Bill.
It is important to remember that our existing legislation has not normally treated sole traders and small businesses as consumers. The Federation of Small Businesses raised its concerns in 2002 in its response to the European Commission’s Green Paper on consumer protection regarding the then forthcoming unfair commercial practices directive. It raised many detailed objections to the directive, the main theme of which was that the Green Paper failed to understand the pressures faced by small businesses, and that it overestimated their capacity. It stated that, "““we are frightened that failure to include small businesses within the EU definition will lead to the removal of these protections at the national level””."
Small businesses rely on postal services and, especially, on energy provision. Where they are let down by their providers, their whole businesses can be threatened. Energywatch and the Federation of Small Businesses have launched a campaign to get better treatment of small businesses as consumers. I am concerned that if small businesses are not specified as consumers, they will be neglected.
The Minister’s response to the amendment in Committee did not quite answer the point. He merely stated: "““The definition of consumer in the Bill deliberately does not exclude any class of consumer””.—[Official Report, 18/12/06;col. GC170.]"
Yet I am sure he will acknowledge that merely omitting a reference to sole traders and small businesses as not themselves covered by the Bill does not endorse them as consumers. The implication of what he said is that he is concerned about specifically including them on grounds that to do so would beg the question of who else must then be specified. But who else would need to be specified?
We have the perfect opportunity to clarify in the Bill the inclusive nature of the NCC. It is vital that sole traders and small businesses are aware that they are considered entirely valid users of Consumer Direct. We highlighted in Committee how important it is for small business and sole traders to correct problems such as energy disconnection as soon as possible for the sake of their businesses and livelihoods.
I hope that the Minister will accept the principle behind the amendment. If he cannot accept it in its present form, I hope that he will come back at Third Reading with a form of words, perhaps with an enabling definition, which would make this clear to both the NCC and the sole-trader and small-business consumer. I beg to move.
Consumers, Estate Agents and Redress Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord De Mauley
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 30 January 2007.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Consumers Estate Agents and Redress Bill [HL].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
689 c135-6 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 11:50:46 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_374438
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_374438
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_374438