Clause 30
Legal Services Bill [Lords]
4:30 pm
Henry Bellingham (Shadow Minister, Constitutional Affairs; North West Norfolk, Conservative)
New clause 12 should be judged in the light of the previous debate, as it, too, is about the separation of functions and proportionality. Some might argue that I am backtracking slightly on what was said in our debate on the previous amendment, which was moved by the hon. Member for Bassetlaw.
The new clause was inspired by the Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys and the Institute of Trade Mark Attorneys. It provides that when exercising its functions under clauses 29 and 30, the board should pay regard to what is proportionate. It makes it clear that the small organisations—a number of approved regulators are small, highly specialist and technical bodies—simply cannot be expected to separate completely their representative and regulatory roles. That point was made by the Minister only a moment ago.
The professions represented by the institutes are not closed; one does not have to be a member of either institute to practice as an attorney. If they started charging their members excessive sums—if their cost base increased too much—they would lose members and thus lose critical mass. That is why they should be treated with proportionality. I urge the Minister to consider accepting new clause 12. She was sympathetic to the previous group of amendments, tabled by myself and the hon. Member for Bassetlaw, and she could combine that with the acceptance of new clause 12. It should protect the small specialist regulators who form an important part of the legal services system.