My Lords, I shall be brief. I wholly support the amendment of the noble Lord, Lord Neill of Bladen, for all the reasons given. Those reasons have been so very well expressed that it would be quite unnecessary to improve on them. Indeed, I do not think that I could. I also very much support the amendment of my noble friend Lord Kingsland. Within the concept of justice in these circumstances, it must be accepted that a decision must be taken on the proportionate balance of the Clause 1 regulatory objectives considered as a whole. That is the judicial process that has commended itself to your Lordships, as the amendments of my noble friend Lord Kingsland in effect establish a new regime of overarching importance. An amendment to this effect was tabled in my name and supported by my noble friend Lord Hunt of Wirral. It was removed from the Marshalled List on the advice of the Public Bill Office. I have been asked why my amendments were not moved. They could not have been spoken to other than on Third Reading. They would have implemented the new regime proposed by my noble friend Lord Kingsland. I thought that I had better explain why they were put on the list and why they were taken off it.
Legal Services Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Campbell of Alloway
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 15 May 2007.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Legal Services Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
692 c140 
Session
2006-07
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 12:30:45 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_396694
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_396694
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_396694