Legal Services Bill [Lords]

It is interesting; yes, the hon. Gentleman is right in that particular instance. As he knows, I also come from a mining constituency and have also had to deal with the sort of cases that he and the hon. Member for Bassetlaw (John Mann) have had to deal with. I know perfectly well how much the current system has failed individuals who deserve better. It is right that the issue should be addressed. However, I do not think that the Minister's blanket exemption fits the bill. It is entirely possible that, with careful drafting, we can arrive at a form of words that exempts the core activities of a trade union but catches activities that fall into the category of general legal practice provided by lawyers who happen to be employed or subject to the supervision of a trade union. Such wording would apply to other mutual bodies as well as trade unions, so that they were put on an equal footing. There would then be the proverbial level playing field for all concerned. I look to the Minister to provide assurances that she will explore such issues before the Bill goes to the other place. I hope that a formulation appears that satisfies the conflicting requirements. If we can do that, we will have achieved all our objectives. I am not persuaded by the exemption before us; it would be better if it were taken away and we looked at it again, and if it were considered again at the other end of the corridor. Hopefully, there would be a much better formulation at the end of the day. I invite my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Yardley to withdraw his amendment. Despite its good intentions and the excellence of much of its content, it, too, does not fit the bill as I have set it out.