My Lords, I will be as brief as I can with this amendment. This is the third time that the issue has come before the House. The names put to the amendment on the first occasion were those of the noble and learned Lord, Lord Mackay of Clashfern—who made a very powerful speech—the noble Lord, Lord Thomas of Gresford, and mine. On Report it was just my name and that of the noble Lord, Lord Thomas of Gresford, and he made a very powerful speech. Now it is down to one, and I intend simply to ask the Minister some questions.
The Minister will recall that, on Report, he stated that the Government accepted that ““insolvency proceedings are untypical”” and—stand apart as they are—that they are, "““one of the few areas where CFAs sometimes work to the advantage of government departments””,"
and creditors generally. Despite that, and despite what I would argue are clear arguments in favour of it, the Government have decided against ““a carve-out”” for insolvency. The Minister announced that there has been, "““agreement across government, in respect of insolvency proceedings””,"
and, "““that new ways will be implemented to deal with these cases without recoverable success fees and insurance premiums””.—[Official Report, 14/3/12; col. 358.]"
The insolvency profession has apparently not been involved in any discussions with the Government about this new way of approaching insolvency proceedings and is concerned that the Ministry of Justice and HMRC may have decided that a contingency legal aid fund could be set up for insolvency cases.
My questions to the Minister are as follows. First, what are the Government planning with regard to insolvency proceedings and—to ask the same question as the noble Lord, Lord Thomas, asked on Report—when will this be implemented? Is it indeed a contingency legal aid fund, or is it not? Secondly, if the Government are not going to exempt insolvency proceedings, will they agree to carry out a proper impact assessment to determine the impact that this will have on the taxpayer and business community? Thirdly, have the Government consulted the insolvency profession on how this might work in practice? Fourthly, will this measure help safeguard returns not just for HMRC but for private businesses as well? Fifthly, will this measure act as a fraud deterrent, as the current system does? Sixthly, if this new way does not work, what protections will the Government put in place to safeguard returns to HMRC and businesses? Could there be an exemption, for example, further down the line? Lastly, can the Minister assure the House that the Government will consult the insolvency profession on the details of these proposals? Those are the questions that I would like answered. I beg to move.
Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Bach
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 27 March 2012.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
736 c1377 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-06-10 14:44:05 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_822171
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_822171
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_822171