Proceeding contribution from Lord Whitty (Labour) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 23 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 was simply reflecting on the fact that consumers can usually expect some degree of support within this House and within the political process but that it seems lamentably absent today on the Liberal Democrat Benches. However, I will withdraw that statement if they can prove me wrong. The issue here is whether we are to establish and reach a partnership—that is a partnership in a sense by negotiation. To negotiate you have to have some powers, otherwise nobody will take you seriously. The Legal Services Board must have substantial powers. As I understood the noble Lord, Lord Hunt, just now, he seemed to say that in terms of sanctions you should move straight from a situation where there is some sort of relatively mild public censure to one where there is takeover, with no intervening sanction. Surely that cannot be what he is advocating—either in terms of this amendment, in relation to restricting the ability to fine to where there is a direction being breached, or in terms of the next group of amendments, which would seek to delete the power to fine entirely, which seems to be where the noble Lord was a few minutes ago. The noble Lord, Lord Kingsland, said explicitly that that was his ultimate and preferred aim. Even under the present circumstances there is an ability to fine—circumstances which are well short of directions. The Legal Services Complaints Commissioner has relatively recently fined the Law Society for a persistent failure to deal with complaints handling sensibly. In other words, those that will be front-line approved regulators have some form in this respect. The fine needs to be available when there is a failure to conduct themselves effectively. A range of sanctions is provided within this legislation, as it is in respect of many regulators. Moving from a relatively mild public admonishment—a tap on the wrist—to a complete takeover of the role of the front-line regulator if the breach was persisted in, does not seem to be sensible regulation and would be in breach of many of the principles of better regulation that we have seen in other fields in recent years. This idea that we should remove, or seriously restrict, the ability to fine a priori would be almost to ride a coach and horses through the intent of the Bill.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 688 c1026-7
- Session
- 2006-07
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Complaints Consumers Appeals Business Competition Legal profession Fees and charges Fines Powers Regulation Rural areas Legal Services Board
- Legislation
- Legal Services Bill (HL) 2006-07
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 11:18:32 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_372321
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_372321
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_372321