Proceeding contribution from Lord Carlile of Berriew (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 18 April 2007. It occurred during Debate on bill on Legal Services Bill [HL].
Legal Services Bill [HL]
My Lords, I apologise for interrupting the Minister. She referred to Clause 27, which is a good example of the complaint that those of us who have spoken to the amendments are making. Where in Clause 27—or anywhere else in the Bill, for that matter—do we find any concession to the discretion, judgment and competence of approved regulators? They have been much praised in debate, but are barely recognised or praised in the Bill. The Minister speaks of a light touch, but Clause 27 has a heavy hand. Should not something in the Bill be seen to be statutory light touch?
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 691 c265
- Session
- 2006-07
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Complaints Consumers Costs Competition Competition Commission Legal profession Fines Exemptions Monitoring Standards Voluntary organisations Regulation 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
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 11:35:25 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_390466
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_390466
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_390466