The noble Lord, Lord Campbell-Savours, raised an important point. The whole question of pilot schemes greatly exercised the Joint Committee and we did not reach a firm conclusion, but it is worth reflecting for a moment whether it might present a way forward. The Minister is right that it is difficult to decide how to structure a pilot scheme. Earlier in our deliberations today the Minister said, ““Who will be the lucky ones who will get those opportunities to demonstrate how alternative business structures can proceed?””, but that is probably the wrong way to look at this.
We had a vigorous debate about pilot schemes on home improvement packs and I engaged in quite a lengthy debate with the Minister's ministerial colleague, the noble Lord, Lord Rooker. We had quite a problem about geographical area and whether the scheme would be voluntary or compulsory. The noble Baroness, Lady Andrews, recently decided that the issue was probably a little more on the backburner now because we have been exploring how it could be introduced and it gets more and more difficult.
However, I also advocated pilot schemes for conditional fee agreements. On reflection, if we had had pilot schemes for conditional fee agreements we might have avoided some of the very serious problems that have arisen. The great advantage of pilot schemes is that you can in a location or particular area look at the effect that a whole new system is going to have. As the noble and learned Lord, Lord Woolf, said earlier, you could have a pilot scheme—although I am not suggesting that Wales, in particular, would be a good idea for a pilot scheme on alternative business structures—in central or north Wales or, indeed, some part of England. You could take a region and see what effect alternative business structures would have. Although the Joint Select Committee did not reach a clear view, I hope that the Minister has not ruled it out. We are all determined to try to make this a success but we need to test the water.
Earlier the Minister was musing on whether she was in favour of evolution or revolution. I have never seen her as a revolutionary. I think that she is much more in favour of evolution. My noble friend referred previously to an incremental approach. There must be a better way in which to test this new concept; even if we do not go back to Sir David Clementi’s ideas of starting with LDPs, we should at least test the water first.
Legal Services Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Hunt of Wirral
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 23 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 c1085 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 11:20:59 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_372435
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_372435
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_372435