Proceeding contribution from Lord Kingsland (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 8 May 2007. It occurred during Debate on bill on Legal Services Bill [HL].
Legal Services Bill [HL]
moved Amendment No. 417: 417: Clause 166, page 85, line 40, at end insert— ““( ) In apportioning or imposing a levy the Board shall have regard, inter alia, to— (a) the extent to which any resulting increase in the regulatory fees of a regulator will be reasonable and proportionate in comparison to the fees already levied on relevant regulated persons; (b) the extent to which the levy might discourage entry to or retention in the regulated sector; (c) the extent to which the number of persons regulated by a regulator might be reduced in consequence of the amount of the levy; (d) the extent to which the regulator might be disadvantaged and another regulator might derive an advantage, in particular through the movement between the regulators of regulated persons as a consequence of any differences in the levy imposed; (e) the likely ability of the regulator to raise the levy from regulated persons; (f) the impact of the levy on the regulator’s viability.”” The noble Lord said: My Lords, I can deal with this amendment telegraphically. The noble Baroness will recall that the two regulators concerned with patents and trademarks were especially concerned about the considerable financial burden of the levy and start-up costs. They believe that further safeguards should be put into the Bill and have proposed in the amendment the same wording that appeared in our previous Amendment No. 142A in Committee. I know that the noble Baroness has set her heart against a definition of proportionality in the Bill but nevertheless I hope that she will accept that the concerns expressed by the authorities, and the fears that flow from them, genuine. Even if she is not prepared to accept the amendment I hope that she will be prepared to provide powerful words of comfort instead. Amendment No. 433 concerns the issue that debt may be recovered only from the practising fees held by a regulator. Those were particular concerns of the patent and trademark regulators and although I do not hold out a great deal of hope that the noble Baroness might find a way of putting the amendment in the Bill I hope nevertheless that she can give me some reassurance. I beg to move.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 691 c1329
- Session
- 2006-07
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Complaints Cost effectiveness Costs Legal profession Finance Fees and charges Law Society Standards Regulation Financial Reporting Council 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 12:25:42 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_395088
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_395088
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_395088