My Lords, I thank all noble Lords who have taken part in this debate. Ultimately, sport is about winning, and it seems pretty clear that, in this group of amendments, my noble friend Lord Hayward won without even having an amendment in the group. That is, perhaps, how sport can go sometimes, as anybody who has played or spectated will very much appreciate. I am grateful to all noble Lords who have commented on my amendments, particularly the noble Lord, Lord Foster of Bath, who brought up gizmos—you can tell he is a scientist.

I say to the Minister that the wording may not be quite right in the amendments, but I ask her to reflect on the principles, strategies and criteria that any technology, while being technology neutral, would have to meet to achieve these objectives. Would that not be worth considering in a Bill of this type as we put it together at this stage? If we take the point of criteria, for example, you can effectively be technology neutral and largely technology future-proof because you focused on criteria and principles. It will be worth reflecting on whether some of that might be of value in the Bill.

Again, I thank all noble Lords who have taken part, and, at this stage, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment 60 withdrawn.

Schedule 5 agreed.

Amendments 61 and 61A not moved.

Clause 18: Enforcement of offences

Amendments 62 and 63 not moved.

Clause 18 agreed.

Schedule 6 agreed.

Clauses 19 to 21 agreed.

Clause 22: Guidance etc

Amendment 64 not moved.

Clause 22 agreed.

Clause 23 agreed.

Clause 24: Interpretation

Amendments 65 to 67 not moved.

Clause 24 agreed.

Clause 25: Power to give financial assistance