Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Darling of Roulanish (Labour) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 6 June 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Company Law Reform Bill (HL).


Company Law Reform Bill [Lords]

No, it would not. The requirement is for the director, in reaching a decision, to have regard to all such matters, including the impact on the community. We cannot have a situation in which, essentially, two groups of people are running a company—one being the directors and the other being people who like or do not like what the company is doing and ask the courts to second-guess the company’s decisions. If we as a society decide that we do not want quarries, the best way to achieve that outcome is to pass legislation forbidding them. If quarries are legal, and provided that all planning permissions are obtained and other legal obligations are met, directors are entitled to reach that decision, because their duty is to the company. However, they do have to have regard to what they are doing. This is an important step forward and many in the other place were deeply opposed to it, but I hope that the House will support it.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
447 c128-9 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Disclosure of information Accountability Audit Accountancy Company law Company accounts Companies Directors Conduct Consolidation bills Animal experiments Fraud Finance Liability Environment protection Harassment Ethics Protection Staff Private companies Working conditions Registration Small businesses Regulation Trade Sustainable development Research Shareholders
Legislation
Company Law Reform Bill (HL) 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk