Clause 11
Legal Services Bill [Lords]
1:00 pm
Jonathan Djanogly (Shadow Solicitor General (Also Shadow Minister for Trade and Industry), Law Officers (Assist the Home Affairs Team); Huntingdon, Conservative)
My hon. Friend the Member for North-West Norfolk made the valid point that the commitment set out in the amendment should not become open-ended. I totally agree with that, and it is a point that we tried to address in the second of our amendments in the group. The Minister also picked up on that point, in a rather dismissive way, I thought. She dismissed our efforts to reduce the exposure, by saying, “Well, even if you put that in place it still wouldn’t work”. To be frank, it is true that the amendment might not be enough, but we were trying to make the point that just because the original amendment would need to be limited, that does not mean that the thought behind it was wrong. We simply need to look at the issue in a more constructive way.
The hon. Member for North Southwark and Bermondsey said the measure was standard practice in other bodies, and the Minister disputed that. I think that she gave the example of Ofcom. Having the advantage of the break, I thought that I would have a quick look at the provisions for Ofcom, which are quite interesting. Section 16(6) of the CommunicationsAct 2003 states:
“The arrangements made by OFCOM under this section must also secure that the Consumer Panel are able, in addition to giving advice on the matters mentioned in subsection (3), to do each of the following—
(a) at the request of OFCOM, to carry out research for OFCOM in relation to any of the matters in relation to which OFCOM have functions under section 14”.
That obviously is similar to what is in the Bill. However, section 16(6)(b) says
“to make arrangements for the carrying out of research into such other matters appearing to the Panel to be relevant to the carrying out of the Panel’s functions as they think fit”.