At Second Reading, I said that it would be a nice idea to get the concept of ““light touch”” into the Bill. I think that I expressed my feelings about my own incompetence as regards how that could possibly be done. It seems to me that this is about as good a shot as you can have at expressing ““light touch””. There may be a slight difficulty with the words, "““must, so far as is reasonably practicable””."
I can see that trouble could develop if the board had established a policy over a particular area or with one part of the profession and if adopting a different policy or some other bit of it was under discussion. There could be potential conflicts ahead where the board might say, ““We’re very sorry, it just isn’t practical. We’ve taken a position and that is how we are acting””. Having said that, I think that this is the best job that one can make of ““light touch””.
Legal Services Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Neill of Bladen
(Crossbench)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 9 January 2007.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Legal Services Bill [HL].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
688 c175-6 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 12:05:48 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_368062
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_368062
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_368062