Proceeding contribution from Lord Maclennan of Rogart (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 6 March 2007. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Legal Services Bill [HL].
Legal Services Bill [HL]
We on these Benches take a broadly similar view to that enunciated by the noble Lord, Lord Kingsland. It is desirable that the work of the Legal Services Board should, as has been said in previous debates, be conducted with a light touch and not be inflated beyond the necessities of the discharge of its duties. The Government have subscribed to this view and no doubt have an interest in the underlying purposes of the legislation being met. But the Government’s continuing involvement in the scrutiny of what is being done would scarcely be more effectively ensured than if they are required, on behalf of the public, to make some contribution to the costs. If the costs became over-inflated because of a misdirection of the board’s activities, it would unquestionably be possible for the Government to enter into a dialogue directly about that. Candidly, I would welcome that. There is a lot in the Bill that gives the power—or, rather, the potentiality—to the Legal Services Board to outgrow the function that has been described in previous debates by the Minister. We have to avoid a propensity towards inflation of activity. A financial check of this kind is entirely justifiable as a matter of principle, since it is the public interest and that of the consumer generally which is benefiting from this important measure to sustain public satisfaction in the work of the legal professions and access to a proper complaints system. All these factors justify some involvement and spreading of the burden beyond those who are being regulated and those who are involved in complaints. We all have an interest in ensuring that this is done properly; we may all, at some time or another, have need of such a system. It is not just those who are availing themselves of it at the present who ought to be responsible for the present charges. For broad reasons of principle and for the practical reason of giving the Government a locus, which I do not doubt they would use, to oversee or at least keep an eye on the work of the Legal Services Board, I strongly support the amendment.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 690 c162
- Session
- 2006-07
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Complaints Disciplinary proceedings Disclosure of information Charities Companies Conveyancing Costs Business Legal profession Finance Fees and charges Licensing Immigration Exemptions Law Society Payments Public bodies Patents Small businesses Regulation Rural areas Solicitors Trade marks General Council of the Bar Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal Legal Services Board Office for Legal Complaints
- Legislation
- Legal Services Bill (HL) 2006-07
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 11:57:21 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_382060
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_382060
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_382060