My Lords, it is a pleasure to follow my noble friend Lord Leigh of Hurley. My amendments in this group largely fit into support and assistance for the small businesses that need to be put in a position to avail themselves of these new provisions from the SBC.

We will come to it in the next group, but it is clear, as my noble friend somewhat alluded to, that this will produce potentially a lot of data which goes nowhere, is of no benefit and is not used to drive any change whatever. But given the nature of the requirements currently set out in the Bill, that data will be produced. Therefore, it seems helpful to look at the various categories of small business and the equalities issues there. Since that data will be part of the collection in any event, having that angle on it will show what targeted support could come from the SBC to support those businesses to better avail themselves of the services. A small business payments charter would be a good focal point for the provisions set out in this Bill, to ensure that those it is aimed at are aware of it and enabled and empowered to make use of it, as and when they need it.

There are also questions of digital access, which is critically important, particularly for small and micro businesses. It will obviously impact their ability to interact with the SBC. It is critical also to have non-digital pathways, but digital is coming whether people like it or not. Digital exclusion needs to be addressed, so that small and micro businesses are not excluded from being able to connect with this process and with the commissioner.

In many groups today, we have continually raised the question of clarity. I think a supply chain is the absolute example of opacity, if anyone tries to go back more than two or three steps in it. I also suggest amendments to look into the payment practices at each tier of the supply chain, particularly tiers 1 and 2, and how they impact the various layers of businesses in those tiers.

My final amendment on ESG is not really about ESG at all or about seeking more and burdensome reporting requirements on small businesses and micro-businesses. Rather, it goes to the point, which has been raised in many previous groups, about how we give clarity at every opportunity on which businesses are not currently good or “gold” when it comes to payments. Given that these ESG requirements exist for large businesses, it would make them more effective and more useful not to add to those 93,000 words but potentially to reduce them, to have some more meaning in them and, particularly in the S and G of ESG, to have the sense that that company has to give detailed reporting on its payment practices. If the large companies made the S and G have far greater meaning in those reports, they could even be shorter as a consequence.