Company Law Reform Bill [HL]

My Lords, the last speaker raises a number of sympathetic thoughts in my mind. He made some useful points, but also indicated matters that lead me to question the achievements that this amendment could have if it were passed. I sympathise, as almost all your Lordships will, with pretty well everything that the noble Lord, Lord Jenkin of Roding, said. He referred to animal rights terrorists who have no scruple, to use the words of the noble Lord, Lord Forsyth, and will stop at nothing. That immediately raises the question of the practical value of this amendment. I am sorry to say that, because one would like to achieve something to damage the effectiveness of these people. I cannot imagine how people without scruple who have shown enormous ingenuity in their activity would not be able through nominee inquiries to find out what they could not get directly if this amendment were passed. My other question often crops up in legislation. We have here a major piece of legislation dealing with the reform of company law. There is a provision which one could latch onto for this particular purpose, the objectives of which I am all in favour of. Is it right, however, in dealing with the question of people’s rights generally to get hold of the names of shareholders for proper purposes, to try to deal with improper purposes? Is it right to try and alter this basically because we naturally strongly disapprove of the activities of certain types of animal rights people who want to get hold of these lists? I very much doubt whether passing an amendment to this Bill, which deals generally with company law, to deal with the particular problem is the right way to go about it.