Legal Services Bill [HL]

What the Joint Committee said on this cannot be taken as gospel or as binding what this Committee decides to do. But it is worth repeating the majority view of the Joint Committee—the noble Lord, Lord Neill of Bladen, has already referred to it—in paragraphs 142 and 144 of volume I of its report. The committee concluded that the Secretary of State should do the appointing but only after full consultation with the Lord Chief Justice. I argue that it reached that view because Sir David Clementi came to the same conclusion. Sir David was quoted by the noble Lord, Lord Hunt of Wirral, who so ably chaired the committee, as saying: "““Given the need for independence, and the objective of the rule of law, it seems right that the judiciary should be involved in the appointment””." He continued: "““The proposal of this Review is that the appointment by the Chairman and Chief Executive should be made by the Secretary of State in consultation with a senior member of the judiciary””. " The Committee should consider carefully that view when deciding on this Bill. It is worth emphasising that Sir David Clementi did not support the conclusion that the appointment had to be made with the ““approval”” of the Lord Chief Justice, or with his ““concurrence””—if there is any difference in the meaning of those two words.