Legal Services Bill [HL]

moved Amendment No. 117ZA: 117ZA: Clause 118, page 61, line 32, at end insert ““, or ( ) investigate the handling of complaints by the OLC (complaints under this subsection include those handled on behalf of the OLC and those referred to approved regulators by the OLC).”” The noble Lord said: My amendment is fairly straightforward; the other grouped amendments in the names of the noble Lords, Lord Maclennan and Lord Thomas of Gresford, spell out its implications. My concern is that, as was said in the first debate this afternoon, while the OLC is the creature of the Legal Services Board in one sense, the fact that both are prescribed in statute means that we have to be clear what the relationship between the two is. All my amendment would do is make it clear that, if the Legal Services Board is to be effective, its powers must be adequate for the purpose of ensuring the performance of its duties by the OLC. If the OLC fails in its duty to handle complaints, the powers of the Legal Services Board need to be at least as great as the current powers of the Office of the Legal Services Complaints Commissioner. Therefore, at the very least, the power to investigate should be included in the Bill. That is all that my amendment suggests. The subsequent amendments in the group deal with the process and sanctions available to the LSB. I hope that my noble friend will explain that the amendments are unnecessary, but we ought to be clear at this stage that the powers of the LSB are at least as great as those that exist at present and adequate for the task that we are now placing on it and on the OLC. I beg to move.