I am not entirely sure how appropriate it is to put forward ideas which do not come within the existing amendments. However, I hope that the Minister might consider a possible alternative under Clause 31, headed ““Directions””. I suggest that subsection (1)(a) should read, "““that an act or omission of an approved regulator is likely to have an adverse impact””."
If one could ask the board to take into account and be satisfied, having taken into account their duties under Clause 3, which refers back to its general duties, it may be that that would meet what was needed. I do not know; I have not consulted anyone else. I am concerned that this does not necessarily remind the board of its Clause 3 duties.
Legal Services Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Butler-Sloss
(Crossbench)
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 c989 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 11:16:45 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_371776
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_371776
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_371776