Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Kingsland (Conservative) 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]

My question was by no means idle. In the course of the Minister’s response—I think to my noble friend Lord Hunt, but possibly to the noble Lord, Lord Maclennan—she said that the Legal Services Board must not rely on her words to interpret its function. If the Minister stands by that, something must clearly be said in the Bill about the supervisory role of the Legal Services Board and the primary regulatory role of the approved regulators if the Legal Services Board is to reflect the philosophy that she has expounded in Committee on more than one occasion. Otherwise, the Legal Services Board will be free to read what it will into this Bill and will be in no way obliged to take note of the Minister’s many statements in these debates about what the proper relationship between these two statutory authorities ought to be. In the light of the Minister’s reply, the importance of something in the Bill reflecting her underlying philosophy becomes extremely important to the Opposition.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
688 c1044 
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