Skip to main content

1-20 of 152 results for subject:Protection

Legislation X
Legal Services Bill (HL) 2006-07

Type

House

Session

Year

Department

Member

Primary member

Answering member

Legislative stage

Legislation

More
Legal Services Bill (HL) 2006-07 (152)

Subject

Publisher


Show detailed: On Off
Results: 10 20 50 100
Sort by: Newest first Oldest first

Legal Services Bill (HL). Committee stage tenth sitting (afternoon). [Part I]. Clauses 138 to 178 agreed to, with clauses 158, 173 and 174 agreed to as amended.

Type
Debates on bills; Public Bill Committee proceedings
Date
26 June 2007
Reference
PBC
House
House of Commons

Legal Services Bill (HL). Committee stage ninth sitting (morning). Written evidence reported to the House (LSB 2). Clause 133, discussed with new clause 17, agreed to as amended. Clauses 134 to 137 agreed to, with clause 136 agreed to as amended. Clause 138 under consideration.

Type
Public Bill Committee proceedings; Debates on bills
Date
26 June 2007
Reference
PBC
House
House of Commons

Legal Services Bill (HL). Committee stage eighth sitting (afternoon). Schedules 13 to 15 agreed to as amended. Clauses 90 to 132 agreed to, with clauses 90, 105, 106, 108 and 111 agreed to as amended.

Type
Debates on bills; Public Bill Committee proceedings
Date
21 June 2007
Reference
PBC
House
House of Commons

Legal Services Bill (HL). Committee stage fifth sitting (morning). Clauses 15 to 20 agreed to, with clause 15 agreed to as amended. Schedule 3 agreed to as amended. Schedule 4 under consideration.

Type
Debates on bills; Public Bill Committee proceedings
Date
19 June 2007
Reference
PBC
House
House of Commons

Letter dated 18/01/2007 from Lord Truscott to the Earl of Caithness regarding the issue of positive licensing in the Consumers, Estate Agents and Redress Bill.

Deposited by
Department of Trade and Industry
Type
Deposited papers
Date
18 January 2007
Reference
HDEP 2007/062
House
House of Lords

Like the noble and learned Lord, Lord Lloyd, while applauding Amendments Nos. 10, 13, 15 and 16, my preference is for the approach taken by Amendment No. 5, which is to require the noble and learned Lord the Lord Chancellor to consult and indeed to have ““the concurrence of””, in...

Member
Lord Kingsland (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
9 January 2007
Reference
688 c141
House
House of Lords

I am most grateful to my noble friend. He was focusing, as I understand it, on the words of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 expressing a statutory obligation on the Lord Chancellor, but would he not agree with me that every Minister in any Government is obliged to uphold the...

Member
Lord Lyell of Markyate (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
9 January 2007
Reference
688 c141
House
House of Lords

Of course I agree with my noble and learned friend that every Minister is bound to uphold the rule of law, but the noble and learned Lord the Lord Chancellor has a specific obligation in relation to the rule of law with respect to the conduct of his Cabinet colleagues....

Member
Lord Kingsland (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
9 January 2007
Reference
688 c141-2
House
House of Lords

Would the noble Baroness like to rephrase that sentence?

Member
Lord Hunt of Wirral (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
9 January 2007
Reference
688 c142
House
House of Lords

I probably need your Lordships’ help. We have strayed into debating three groups of amendments. It would be much easier for me if I could deal with them all at the same time, but, sadly, the groupings do not work like that. I will have to be the one with...

Member
Baroness Ashton of Upholland (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
9 January 2007
Reference
688 c142
House
House of Lords

I do not know whether it is in order for me to speak briefly. I want to make a point that I do not want to elaborate on but I think that it would be rather hypocritical of me simply to go along with what the Minister said. I believe...

Member
Lord Lyell of Markyate (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
9 January 2007
Reference
688 c144
House
House of Lords

Probably, but I will not try—the noble Lord can do it for me. The noble and learned Lord, Lord Lyell, asked me about issues to do with the breakdown of the responsibilities between the Lord Chancellor and the Secretary of State. I would rather deal with that when we come...

Member
Baroness Ashton of Upholland (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
9 January 2007
Reference
688 c142-4
House
House of Lords

I welcome this exchange, which is beginning to focus on some of the questions that have caused concern. It has not been part of our argument that the process of appointment or objectives of the Legal Services Board are identical to those of the judiciary. The Government have provided a...

Member
Lord Maclennan of Rogart (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
9 January 2007
Reference
688 c146-7
House
House of Lords

It has perhaps escaped the Government that there is a conflict with the Government themselves in so many fields of the legal profession. The independence of the judiciary is guaranteed in this country because there is also an independent legal profession. If the Minister had ever had the experience I...

Member
Lord Thomas of Gresford (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
9 January 2007
Reference
688 c147
House
House of Lords

I confess that I find the Minister's reply on this amendment somewhat disappointing. Although she has given some praise and support to the changes in regulations in respect of other professions and other bodies, and suggested that the rules applicable to them are, by general consent, working well, in this...

Member
Lord Maclennan of Rogart (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
9 January 2007
Reference
688 c145-6
House
House of Lords

I am sorry to disappoint the noble Lord. I shall try to help him understand the direction in which I seek to go. I do not accept the principle that the appointment of the judiciary is equivalent to the appointment of a regulatory body determining the relationship between the consumer...

Member
Baroness Ashton of Upholland (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
9 January 2007
Reference
688 c146
House
House of Lords

I have a small point but it may be important in relation to the amendments to come. When the Minister spoke of Her Majesty signifying assent to such appointments—I may be quite wrong and I shall read Hansard carefully to see whether I am—she seemed to suggest that Her Majesty...

Member
Lord Wedderburn of Charlton (Crossbench)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
9 January 2007
Reference
688 c145
House
House of Lords

The role of Her Majesty in determining appointments varies. I would not wish to suggest that Her Majesty would always be bound to accept the recommendation in all circumstances because I do not know how appointments would be set out in individual cases. Certainly Her Majesty would look very carefully...

Member
Baroness Ashton of Upholland (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
9 January 2007
Reference
688 c145
House
House of Lords

I completely respect and accept what the noble and learned Lord says about the importance of the legal professions. Nothing that I have said is meant to imply other than the importance of the role that they and, separately, the judiciary play and the value that we place on them....

Member
Baroness Ashton of Upholland (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
9 January 2007
Reference
688 c144-5
House
House of Lords

moved Amendment No. 5: 5: Schedule 1, page 112, line 6, at end insert ““with the concurrence of the Lord Chief Justice”” The noble Lord said: Amendment No. 5 and the other grouped amendments raise issues which have been foreshadowed in the debate just concluded. The wording of Amendments Nos....

Member
Lord Kingsland (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
9 January 2007
Reference
688 c148-9
House
House of Lords