Legal Services Bill [HL]

moved Amendment No. 32: 32: Clause 3 , page 2, line 25, leave out ““, so far as is reasonably practicable,”” The noble Lord said: The Minister might find a certain irony in the fact that in Amendment No. 31 we were urging her to accept an amendment which contained the expression, "““so far as is reasonably practicable””," but in Amendment No. 32 we ask her to remove that expression from Clause 3. As I hope will become clear, our approach is wholly rational in relation to both amendments. Amendment No. 32 refers to Clause 3, which concerns the Legal Services Board’s duty to promote the regulatory objectives set out in Clause 1(1). Clause 3(2) states: "““The Board must, so far as is reasonably practicable, act in a way—""““(a) which is compatible with the regulatory objectives, and""““(b) which the Board considers most appropriate for the purpose of meeting those objectives””." Our submission is that if one expunges the expression, "““so far as is reasonably practicable””," from Clause 3(2), the Government will still get exactly what they want from the clause. We believe that the expression, "““so far as is reasonably practicable””," unnecessarily qualifies Clause 1(1). What is the point of setting out the regulatory objectives in Clause 1(1) if one does not require the board to respect them in Clause 3(2)? If the expression is left in the clause, clearly one removes the obligation, in some circumstances, for the board to act in accordance with the regulatory objectives. I believe that Clause 3(2)(b) fulfils exactly what the Government ought to want from the clause. The board ought to respect the regulatory objectives, but equally it ought to have the discretion to determine the most appropriate manner for meeting those objectives. As long as the board has discretion to determine the way in which an objective is met, surely that is sufficient. Surely in those circumstances the board can meets its obligation to meet the objective if it has the flexibility to decide the manner in which the objective is met. In short, in our view, the expression, "““so far as is reasonably practicable””," not only unnecessarily undermines the objectives set out in Clause 1, but it is otiose because Clause 3(2)(b) meets all the requirements that the Government could possibly want from the clause. I beg to move.