I am most grateful for the Minister’s response. I accept that there may be difficulties with my crafting of the amendment; but if the government lawyers say that it does not achieve the result I want, that still leaves us with the problem. The expression ““so far as is reasonably practicable”” leaves it open to the Legal Services Board to effectively ignore one or other of the objectives in making its decision. That would not be acceptable. So if our amendment does not achieve the objective we wish, we must find some other way of doing so.
Nor is it in the Government’s interest that the Legal Services Board should effectively be able to make a decision by ignoring one of the objectives it is obliged to take into account under the Bill. We must find a solution to that problem. If the amendment does not do so, I hope the Government will go back to their lawyers and find some other way of doing so which does not involve a clause entitling the Legal Services Board to ignore one of its objectives.
Legal Services Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Kingsland
(Conservative)
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 c179 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_368069
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_368069
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_368069