That is something, as I think that I indicated when introducing the amendment, with which we respectfully agree. It would be possible in our view, in the context of the amendment, for the board to act in relation to a breach of only one of the regulatory objectives as long as the breach was sufficiently serious to have an impact on the objectives taken together. That is the point—and it is a crucial point because it flows from the clear obligation on the board under Clause 1(1) to consider all the objectives. If it then decides that the breach of one of those objectives is so serious that there is an adverse effect on the objectives collectively, it may act.
The Opposition would be extremely grateful if the Minister would reflect on this issue between now and Report. As I have in relation to one or two other amendments this afternoon, I think it only proper that I indicate to the Minister that this is one thatwe take very seriously. We hope that some accommodation can be reached between the Government and the House leading up to Report. Meanwhile, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
[Amendment No. 48 not moved.]
Clause 30 agreed to.
Clause 31 [Directions]:
Legal Services Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Kingsland
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 22 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 c987-8 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 11:16:44 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_371773
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_371773
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_371773