Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Kingsland (Conservative) 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 am grateful to the Minister. We know from what she said in Committee that she supports the principle behind the amendment. However, we have also heard today that she is reluctant to see that principle expressed in the Bill. She said that she was against any attempt to further define the relationship between the Legal Services Board and the approved regulator. However, my complaint, and that of my noble and learned friend Lord Mackay is that there is no definition at all in the Bill of the relationship between the Legal Services Board and the approved regulator, reflecting the principle of lightness of touch, which all government Ministers have said ought to be the prevailing principle. We have debated this matter at great length for many months. It is time to test the opinion of your Lordships’ House. On Question, Whether the said amendment(No. 174) shall be agreed to? Their Lordships divided: Contents, 169; Not-Contents, 130.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
691 c266 
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