I could make many comments, all of which would be wrong. I will therefore not make them. The hon. Lady illustrates the point very well. It is important for us to explore the matter. I hope that the Government can illustrate some of the principles that they seek to apply.

The Conservative party would like to make a couple of points to get the debate under way. It is clear that there are examples of characteristics that, although they may closely track age, could be a legitimate ground for differentiation. In some cases, insurance is a good example, because the risk for drivers’ insurance correlates quite closely with age. Incidentally, it does not just rise inexorably with age. It tends to start off very high for people who have just got their driving licence in their late teens. It then drops, and when we are all getting on a bit, it starts to rise towards the higher age range.

Interestingly, insurance companies that specialise in the area point out that, although the risk per mile travelled may go up as the miles travelled by people who are in the 70s, 80s and 90s tend to fall steadily, the combined risk may still be comparatively low. But that is a clear example of a goods or service where it may be perfectly legitimate to differentiate on the basis of age, as there is a genuine and evidenced example of changing risk—insurance is, by definition, all about risk. We need to have a view on that and understand it. Equally, I am sure that Sheilas’ Wheels and others would argue that women drivers have different risk profiles from men. That is the basis of a lot of its business and allows it to carve out a profitable one.

It is vital to get such matters on the record, if we can, which is why I am inviting the Solicitor-General to expand on them. The wording of our two amendments is less important than giving such an opportunity to the hon. and learned Lady. The amendments would merely take the basic level of law back to that of providing public services. All members of the Committee accept that, by and large, public services should be provided to everyone. It is hard to think of one that should not be provided to elderly people, but only to young people. For example, we want medical care provided across all age groups. That is a convenient peg, a starting point or a foundation stone on which I invite the hon. and learned Lady to construct her tower of ideas and principles with which I hope we can reassure several companies.

The danger of saying that certain issues will become illegal unless and until the Solicitor-General decides that they are not and uses some of the powers in later parts of the Bill, is that enormous uncertainty will be created in the minds of investors, management, staff and potential customers of many of the companies whose businesses could be affected. Depending on the hon. and learned Lady’s response, additional amendments might be tabled later in our proceedings.