Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord McKenzie of Luton (Labour) in the House of Lords on Thursday, 30 March 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee proceeding on Company Law Reform Bill [HL].


Company Law Reform Bill [HL]

The Government share the noble Baroness’s view that the independent supervisor should be, and should be seen to be, independent. Indeed, the framework of provisions in Part 33 does not provide any opportunity for the auditors general to influence the decisions of the independent supervisor. I have no hesitation in saying that we do not think that one person fulfilling the role of auditor general and supervisor is appropriate in any circumstances. It certainly would not constitute effective supervision. It is inconceivable that any Secretary of State would appoint an independent supervisor who is the same person as an auditor general. Furthermore, it would be contrary to community law for the Secretary of State to appoint the same person. Accordingly, it is already the case that such an appointment would be unlawful, and there is no need to make further provision to that effect on the face of the Bill. I think that is stated as clearly as possible and I hope it will satisfy the noble Baroness.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
680 c429-30GC 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Disclosure of information Data protection Databases Audit Accountancy Company law Company accounts Companies Directors Applications Administration Court orders ICT Liability Information Documents Internet Electronic commerce Email Qualifications Personal records Public companies Staff Postal services Registration Reform Companies House Professional Oversight Board for Accountancy Statutory instruments
Legislation
Company Law Reform Bill (HL) 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk