Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Kingsland (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Monday, 22 January 2007. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Legal Services Bill [HL].


Legal Services Bill [HL]

I am most grateful to the noble Baroness for her response and to all noble Lords who have intervened in the debate. Throughout the Committee, I believe there is a consensus about the role of the Legal Services Board and how dangerous it would be if it sought to interfere with a system that is plainly working extremely well. The Government have given me confidence in the view expressed by the noble Baroness that there is no intention whatever of the Legal Services Board being proactive in this area. It merely has a duty to ensure that a system is out there in civil society to ensure that the appropriate standards are kept. Provided the board is satisfied that that is the case, that is the end of the matter and there will be no activism under Clause 4. I continue to believe that ““ensure”” is better than ““assist””, but I will leave the noble Baroness to reflect on that between now and Report. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. [Amendment No. 34A had been withdrawn from the Marshalled List.] [Amendment No. 35 not moved.] [Amendment No. 35A had been withdrawn from the Marshalled List.] Clause 4 agreed to.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
688 c916 
Session
2006-07
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Consumers Appeals Competition Legal profession Fees and charges Education Law Society Public appointments Patents Standards Training Regulation Solicitors Trade marks Wills Legal Services Board Legal Services Consumer Panel
Legislation
Legal Services Bill (HL) 2006-07
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk