I do not normally quote myself, but we have a principle in the courts that you can refer, if challenged, to the consistency of what you have previously said. Therefore, this is what I said at Second Reading: "““There is undoubtedly a case for a one-stop professional service so that accountants, insurance agents, estate agents or architects may make cost savings in marketing, administration and office expenses. There are certainly benefits for the professionals, but I query whether there are benefits for the consumer of having only one door to go through, but then being directed to various offices inside a single building””.—[Official Report, 6/12/06; col. 1174.]"
There are benefits and cost savings for the professionals, and I have no doubt that that is why the Law Society has expressed such support for the idea. I know that the Law Society has supported this. It is not doing so with the consumer in mind. It sees it as a way of sharing costs and expenses and possibly of getting more people through the door. However, from the consumer’s point of view, that is not a way that the Government should go. If they really put the consumer first, it is wrong.
As the Minister said, we on these Benches have a track record of supporting consumers. I am not speaking for lawyers; I am speaking on behalf of the consumers. I can do it because I have seen the legal profession at every level, from articled clerk all the way through, and I can see the service that is provided. I reject the suspicion that has permeated some of the comments on the Bill that any objection to what the Government are doing is the result of the lawyers getting together in some way and trying to do down the public. That is rubbish. Although I shall withdraw my opposition to the clause for the moment, I look forward to the further fresh thinking that the Minister promised us to see whether anything actually emerges. In the mean time, I hope to work with the noble Lord, Lord Kingsland, on some of his ideas, which at the least will have an ameliorating effect.
Clause 70 agreed to.
Clause 71 [““Licensable body””]:
Legal Services Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Thomas of Gresford
(Liberal Democrat)
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 c1089 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 11:21:00 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_372443
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_372443
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_372443