No, I disagree with that. We are relying on legislation that sets out how independent bodies will operate in conjunction with each other. Noble Lords would wish us to set that out as firmly as we can, recognising the advantages in primary and secondary legislation of the flexibility that we need. We sought to do that by clarifying the circumstances under which it operates. However, we want to add that if something as critical as the removal of the chairman were to occur, it is important that there should be an accountability process and that the Secretary of State or the Lord Chancellor should play that role. I do not think that there is anything contradictory in this. This is about independence but it is also about accountability on an area of policy that is, as noble Lords have made very clear over the past few days in Committee, of critical importance in our recognising the roles played by the professional legal services. That is what we have sought to do.
Legal Services Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Ashton of Upholland
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 21 February 2007.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Legal Services Bill [HL].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
689 c1093-4 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 11:08:46 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_378835
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_378835
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_378835