Legal Services Bill [HL]

My Lords, as to the substance of the amendment, the power that the Government have given themselves in the schedule is extremely wide and uncontrolled. The Lord Chancellor is given the power to expand or contract the size of the Legal Services Board. This is another part of the Bill that goes to the heart of the independence of the board. It is now stated in the Bill that the noble and learned Lord the Lord Chancellor must havethe concurrence of the Lord Chief Justice on the appointment and dismissal of the chairman and members of the board. We have not sought that kind of guarantee in relation to Schedule 1(3) because we felt that the reasons given by the noble Baroness for the retention of that power and the commitment toan affirmative resolution were enough. Without the affirmative resolution, the Government are given dangerously uncontrolled power. However, the core issue is the one to which I referred in Amendment No. 1. The statement was made on the face of the Bill. As a consequence, noble Lords on both the official Opposition and Liberal Democrat Benches did not table amendments to this part of the Bill which they otherwise would have tabled. Although I shall not press this amendment to a vote, I say again to the noble Baroness: just think of the convention on undertakings given by Ministerson the Floor of the House. When the Bill reaches another place, I suggest that the correct thing to do would be for the Government to put the requirement for an affirmative resolution in the Bill. Constitutionally, that is the only proper way to proceed. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. Schedule 3 [Exempt persons]: