My Lords, I am grateful to the Minister for his reply, and he has clearly thought about this issue. I have two things to say. First, this was only a proposal for enabling legislation; we were not suggesting that it should happen. It would just give the Secretary of State another arrow in his quiver, so to speak. I think that the Minister was moving towards the fallback position of encouraging Companies House to have the legal name of the audit firm as a searchable record. We felt that that was a good fallback position and probably less complicated, and possibly less expensive, than a unique identifier.
It would be helpful if the Minister could do all that he can to assuage the concerns of the audit profession by encouraging Companies House to introduce that searchable field facility, which presumably can be done at relatively little cost, and that would probably solve the problem. I think that we have probably gone about as far as we can on this matter and I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Company Law Reform Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Hodgson of Astley Abbotts
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 16 May 2006.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Company Law Reform Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
682 c226 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 20:21:03 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_322289
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_322289
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_322289