My Lords, I agree entirely with the points just made by my noble friend. The views of the legal profession—the Bar and the Law Society—ought to be taken into account, and perhaps the noble and learned Lord who is to reply to the debate can comment on that. My understanding is that both have made submissions to the Government about their concern—concern which is profound and goes to the heart of what we are talking about. It is essential that the director's independence from the Government is ensured and underlined, so there can be no cavilling about this. The issue is vital—always provided, of course, that the caveat entered by the Opposition's amendment is underlined as well.
The final point I want to make is this. We are not legislating for the immediate future, we are legislating for the long term. If we are wrong, we can always amend it, but the principle that ought to be underlined in this debate is exactly that—that we are debating for the long term.
Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Clinton-Davis
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 5 March 2012.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
735 c1601 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 15:50:51 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_814659
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_814659
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_814659