Company Law Reform Bill [HL]

moved Amendment No. 1:"Page 2, line 5, at end insert ““and Chapter 1 of Part 32 (business names)””" The noble Lord said: My Lords, in moving Amendment No. 1, I shall speak also to Amendments Nos. 2 and 9, which concern Clauses 1, 9 and 16. I am sure that all of us who have been involved with this Bill from the beginning share my great pleasure that we have reached Report stage. After 13 Grand Committee sittings, which the Minister told us lasted more than 50 hours, and during which we discussed 1,140 amendments, it is with even greater pleasure, and with some relief, that I see, looking through the Marshalled List of amendments before us, that although there are 513 of them, on 86 pages, the Government have taken on board a good many of our arguments and sought to meet the points that we made. I am extremely grateful to the Government for that. Before we get carried away on a tide of thanks and self-congratulation, there are still areas of concern in the Bill that we need to reconsider. When he introduced the Bill at Second Reading on 11 January, the noble Lord, Lord Sainsbury, said that the strategic objectives of the Bill were,"““enhancing shareholder engagement and a long-term investment culture; ensuring better regulation and a ‘think small first’ approach; making it easier to set up and run a company; and providing flexibility for the future””.—[Official Report, 11/01/06; col. 182.]" As part of those he stated that the,"““underlying approach in this Bill has been to simplify. Sometimes this has been a question of making substantive changes of policy, and sometimes it has been more an issue of simplifying the drafting of the law to make the language more accessible””.—[Official Report, 11/01/06; col. 243.]" So comprehensibility and accessibility are clearly the key objectives. Our first amendment seeks to achieve that. This would make references in Clause 1 more comprehensive in defining which provisions apply to which companies. Surely, in doing that, we further both aims of the Government. Disappointingly, the Government appear to think not. Another key objective was to create a uniform UK platform for company law. We have no problem with that. Amendments Nos. 2 and 9 address this issue directly. The Bill now provides that company law will be provided for throughout the United Kingdom in one statute: a considerable achievement and one that will doubtless promote businesses within the UK and UK business overseas. However, we remain saddled, in various parts of the Bill, with the archaic requirement that companies tie themselves to one region within the United Kingdom. If we are to have one UK law, why should companies have to state whether they are registered in Scotland, Northern Ireland, England and Wales, or just in Wales? Surely, it is sufficient to provide an address in the registration documents and state on the certificate of incorporation that the company is UK registered? Again, I fear that the Government do not agree. There is no doubt that this Bill will be of considerable benefit to UK business, but there are still improvements to be made. I hope that during the remainder of this Bill’s passage through this House we can make the final improvements to this Bill for the sake of UK plc, in the success of which we all have a very direct interest. I beg to move.