Legal Services Bill [HL]

My Lords, we listened very carefully to what was said in Committee. In our amendment, we thought not only that we had encapsulated the spirit of what was said but that our amendment had gone a little further. I have listened carefully to the noble Lord, Lord Hunt, but I am not sure whether he likes the government amendment or feels that it does not go far enough. Therefore, I will present the government amendment and, if there are further things to think about before Third Reading, we will be more than happy to consider them. When we debated Amendment No. 248, my noble friend said that the Government had tabled an amendment of their own about monitoring ABS. We have come to the conclusion that we should place the board under a specific duty to report on the development of ABS. This amendment fulfils the commitment we gave in Committee. It integrates reporting into the board’s annual report. The board will have a permanent duty to include ABS. The report is, of course, laid before Parliament, so this will reinforce parliamentary scrutiny of ABS as provided for in Amendment No. 248. Placing the monitoring duty on the board keeps all oversight of ABS in one place, which gives a more joined-up approach to checking how the regulatory objectives are being met. The reporting duty covers licensing authorities and licensed bodies. This means that the board will be monitoring not only the decisions of licensing authorities, which it would anyway in its oversight role, but also the practical effects of those decisions. Amendment No. 317 places responsibility for monitoring and reporting on the board rather than on the Lord Chancellor, a point with which the noble Lord, Lord Hunt, disagrees, or on a separate research body, as in Amendment No. 316. This ensures that all oversight responsibilities are kept in one place and thus guarantees a consistent approach. The reporting duty is focused. It is not merely about the development of ABS, but specifically about the effects of ABS activity on the regulatory objectives. This allows all the objectives to be considered, including, of course, access to justice. But it remains consistent with Amendment No. 248 in that it does not single out any one objective. As my noble friend pointed out, all the objectives need to be considered together to capture the interactions between them. This amendment carries that through into reporting on Part 5. I am grateful to the noble Lords, Lord Kingsland and Lord Hunt, for raising this point in Committee. I hope that our amendment slightly improves on that tabled by the noble Lord, Lord Hunt, although that may be a rather arrogant statement. Rather than being covered after a fixed period, Part 5 will always feature in the board’s report. The board will be able to report on initial steps and will continue to report as ABS develops and reaches a steady state. Of course, the board, Ministers and Parliament will all remain free to recommend change if reports or events reveal that it is necessary. Before I formally move our amendment, I wish to repeat that we would be very happy to discuss with the noble Lord, Lord Hunt, any improvement he feels that we may achieve to this government amendment before Third Reading.