My Lords, I do not think there is any ambiguity about what ““notice of resolution”” is referred to at the beginning of Clause 493(4), if I understand the thrust of the amendment. There is only one ““notice of resolution”” mentioned in the clause; indeed there is only one resolution involved and it is specifically mentioned in the preceding line. I do not think that we need these extra words. Clause 493 provides that the name of the auditor—and, if the auditor is a firm, the name of the senior statutory auditor—must be included in the copies of the auditor’s report that it sends out. There is an exception where there is a risk of violence or intimidation, as we have just discussed.
I am not sure whether that fully deals with the point that has been raised. However, there is only one resolution and notice of that resolution then has to be given to the Secretary of State. Subsection (4) sets out what information must be in that notice. I am not sure if that does not deal with the point, if I have fully followed the point which has been raised. The noble Baroness may wish to have another go.
Company Law Reform Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord McKenzie of Luton
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 14 March 2006.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Company Law Reform Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
679 c403-4GC 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-22 01:35:41 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_308088
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_308088
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_308088