Legal Services Bill [HL]

I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Bach, for reminding us of, I think, the only division that we had in the Joint Committee. No, there were two divisions, but this division was initiated by the noble Lord himself, in relation to the words that he has just referred to. This is in no way critical of the noble Lord, Lord Neill of Bladen, as he was absent for very good reasons, but, had he been present, the vote would have been tied. I say that only because there were differing views within the Joint Committee. Therefore, I would not disagree with a word that the noble Lord, Lord Bach, has just said—that was our conclusion. But even that conclusion does not meet with the approval of the Government and it is right to remind ourselves that, until this moment, the Government have not given ground on anything in this area, whether on ““in full consultation with””, or ““with the concurrence of””, the Lord Chief Justice. Of course, as the noble Lord, Lord Bach, will know, my preference in that division was for the word to be ““concurrence”” rather than ““consultation””. It was an amendment at the time—