My Lords, I declare an interest as a non-executive director of a firm providing some legal services to the trade union movement. My anxiety with the amendment tabled by the noble Lord, Lord Kingsland, is that it would narrow the scope of the exemption so that certain specialist services provided by trade unions to members would no longer be covered. I am thinking of, for example, advice in relation to aspects of education law, in relation to union members acting as pension trustees on their pension schemes, in relation to legal disputes that might affect third parties such as other employees within the workplace or students, or in relation to intellectual property or performance rights.
The proposed changes would create legal uncertainty about when the exemption would apply to trade unions. Given that failure to act within the exemption could result in a trade union official committing a criminal offence, we believe that it is essential that the wording of the exemption is clear and does not include such uncertainty. The best way of ensuring that trade unions can continue to provide effective representation in workplaces and specialist legal services to members relating to many different aspects of employment is to provide a broadly defined exemption in the Bill. We believe that the existing wording of Clause 15 should be retained.
Legal Services Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Sawyer
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 17 October 2007.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Legal Services Bill [HL].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
695 c717 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 11:52:11 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_417980
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_417980
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_417980