[Janet Anderson in the Chair]

On a point of order, Mrs. Anderson. I refer back to an amendment that I moved last Thursday under clause 16 on retro-reflective markings. I withdrew that amendment on the grounds that the Minister said that it might not be permissible to fit such markings on heavy goods vehicles in Britain. He said:

“I remind my hon. Friend that we have the powers to permit the tape, but not to require it. We do not need new powers in order to permit it.”—[Official Report, Standing Committee A, 23 March 2006; c. 150.]

Since last Thursday’s sitting, I have received notification that the Commission has allowed the Italians to proceed on a legal basis to fit such marker tape to their HGVs. If I provide the Minister with the Italian legislation, which I have to hand, would he reconsider the matter before Report?

The hon. Gentleman will be aware that we have already debated clause 16 and amendment No. 77, but I am sure that the Minister will want to make a note of what the hon. Gentleman said and perhaps we can return to the matter on Report.

Further to that point of order, Mrs. Anderson. The hon. Member for Bolton, South-East (Dr. Iddon) is absolutely right: the Italian Government legislated in exactly the same way that we proposed to do through our two amendments. They specified domestic vehicles over 3.5 tonnes, not 7.5 tonnes as we proposed, and to date there has been no objection from the European Commission. As we understand it, such material has been placed on Italian lorries, and the Commission has not said that that is illegal.

During last Thursday’s sitting, the Minister suggested that

“the amendment and the clause are redundant and perhaps illegal.”—[Official Report, Standing Committee A, 23 March 2006; c. 148.]

Would the Minister clarify the status of amendment No. 77, which would have had the effect of allowing this material by 1 January 2007? Are we in a position to debate that amendment at the end of the proceedings, because it comes right at the end of the Bill, or would it be better to refer to the matter on Report? That would give the Minister and his officials time to make a careful study of what has happened in Italy, to establish how the Italians have done it and to find out why there is a difference in legal opinion between the Italian and British Governments.

I am advised that we have already debated amendment No. 77, and clause 16 no longer stands part of the Bill. We debated it and the Committee reached a decision, but it will be possible to return to the matter on Report, and I am sure that the Minister will want to take account of the points raised.