Proceeding contribution from Lord Patten (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Thursday, 2 November 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Companies Bill [HL].
Companies Bill [HL]
My Lords, I believe that the noble Lord's colleague in the House of Commons was very firmly bounced by NGOs and others into making these provisions. It was not something that the Government had toyed with bringing forward until the lobbying gained apace at a later stage. My point about legislative fatigue is the way in which the Government rolled over to the lobbying and that is why I think the DTI has shown a certain amount of mettle fatigue as well. That is doubtless why the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, in his appearance in another place before the Select Committee on Trade and Industry on 24 October, stalwartly refused to give any undertaking at all that he thought that the department had a long-term life in front of it. My second point is in strong support of what my noble friend said about the effect of these provisions on smaller companies with just one, two or three suppliers. I believe that this will be a very onerous burden. She has set the point out very clearly and I shall not attempt to be a little Lord Echo to what she has said so forcefully. Thirdly, I believe that we should all be aware of legislative creep, of regulatory creep and of compliance creep in this legislation. My noble friend on the Front Bench said that big companies can handle the extra regulatory box-ticking through which they will have to go, but, I predict that a whole new industry will emerge and companies will have to be very stalwart in resisting it in order to give gainful employment to professional services, firms and others, coming forward with seminars, breakfast meetings and new undertakings that they feel companies should fulfil. I think that some companies, innocent though they may sometimes be, will fall for this. We will see a great deal more regulation, self-imposed by companies, thanks to compliance creep urged forward by professional services firms. I do not believe that the purposes of industry, business and commerce have been particularly well served in respect of these provisions by the CBI and, in particular, by the Institute of Directors. The words of Mr Templeman, the director-general of the Institute of Directors, which have already been quoted in your Lordships' House, will come back to haunt him in future years after having had a cup of tea with Mrs Hodge, who told him that everything was going to be all right. She does not have that effect on me, my Lords.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 686 c460-1
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Disclosure of information Accountability Charities Audit Company law Company accounts Companies Directors Business Conduct Annual reports Certification Freedom of information Inspections Eligibility Liability Donors EU law Investment Ethics Powers Membership Public interest Political parties Public companies Loans Private companies Small businesses Shares Trade unions Voting rights Shareholders
- Legislation
- Companies Bill (HL) 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 21:12:50 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_357654
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_357654
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_357654