| Legal Services Bill [Lords] - continued | House of Commons |
| back to previous text | |
|
Mr Henry Bellingham
244 # Clause 28, page 14, line 9, leave
out ‘, so far as is reasonably practicable,’. Mr Henry Bellingham
245 # Clause 29, page 14, line 26, leave
out ‘prejudiced’ and insert ‘improperly constrained
or influenced’. Mr Kevan Jones 263 # Clause 30, page 15, line 8, at end insert— ‘( ) that the majority of the ordinary members of a committee that an approved regulator authorises to exercise its regulatory functions are lay persons.’. Mr Henry Bellingham
246 # Clause 30, page 15, line 16, at end insert— ‘(3A) When making rules
under subsections (1) to (3), the Board must satisfy itself that approved
regulators have established organisational structures and procedural
practices which distinguish sufficiently clearly between their regulatory
and representative functions.’. Bridget Prentice 1 Clause 31, page 15, line 30, leave
out from ‘on’ to ‘and’ in line 31 and insert
‘one or more of the regulatory objectives,’. This amendment reverses one made in the House of Lords which changed one of the conditions for Board action so as to refer to the likelihood of an adverse impact on the regulatory objectives taken as a whole, rather than on one or more of those objectives. Bridget Prentice 2 Clause 32, page 16, line 14, leave
out from ‘have,’ to end of line 15 and insert ‘an
adverse impact on one or more of the regulatory objectives,’. This amendment reverses one made in the House of Lords which changed a condition for Board action so as to refer to the likelihood of a significant adverse impact on the regulatory objectives taken as a whole, rather than an adverse effect on one or more of those objectives. Bridget Prentice 3 Clause 35, page 17, line 27, leave
out from ‘have,’ to ‘and’ in line 28 and insert
‘an adverse impact on one or more of the regulatory objectives,’. This amendment reverses one made in the House of Lords which changed a condition for Board action so as to refer to the likelihood of a significant adverse impact on the regulatory objectives taken as a whole, rather than an adverse effect on one or more of those objectives. Mr Henry Bellingham
247 # Clause 36, page 18, line 15, at end add— ‘(4A) As soon as practicable after deciding to publish a statement, the Board must give notice to the approved regulator stating that it has reached that decision and setting out the terms in which the statement is to be published; and the Board must not publish the statement until after the expiry of 7 days beginning with the day on which notice is given under this subsection.’. Simon Hughes
225 Clause 37, page 18, line 30, at end insert— ‘( ) The Board may not
determine that it is appropriate to impose a penalty unless it is satisfied
that the matter cannot be adequately addressed by the Board exercising
the powers available to it under sections 31 to 36.’. To ensure that the Legal Services Board does not impose financial penalties where lesser sanctions would suffice. Mr Henry Bellingham
248 # Clause 39, page 20, line 3, at end insert— ‘(da) that the imposition of the penalty on any ground that would give rise to a claim for judicial review.’. Mr Henry Bellingham
249 # Clause 39, page 20, line 27, leave out subsection (7). Bridget Prentice 4 Clause 41, page 21, line 9, leave
out from ‘have,’ to ‘and’ in line 10 and insert
‘an adverse impact on one or more of the regulatory objectives,’. This amendment reverses one made in the House of Lords which changed a condition for Board action so as to refer to the likelihood of a significant adverse impact on the regulatory objectives taken as a whole, rather than an adverse effect on one or more of those objectives. Bridget Prentice 5 Clause 45, page 23, line 29, leave
out from ‘have,’ to ‘and’ in line 30 and insert
‘an adverse impact on one or more of the regulatory objectives,’. This amendment reverses one made in the House of Lords which changed a condition for Board action so as to refer to the likelihood of a significant adverse impact on the regulatory objectives taken as a whole, rather than an adverse effect on one or more of those objectives. Mr Henry Bellingham
250 # Clause 47, page 25, line 27, leave out subsection (5) and insert— ‘(5) If the order which the Board intends to make differs from the draft published under subsection (2) in a way which in the opinion of the Board is material, the Board must, before making the order, publish the draft order along with a statement detailing the changes made and the reasons for those changes.’. Bridget Prentice 6 Clause 49, page 27, line 1, leave out subsection (3) and insert— ‘( ) In preparing a statement of policy, the Board must have regard to the principle that its principal role is the oversight of approved regulators. ( ) The statement of policy prepared under subsection (1) must— (a) take account of the desirability of resolving informally matters which arise between the Board and an approved regulator, and (b) specify how, in exercising the functions mentioned in
that subsection, the Board will comply with the requirements of section
3(3) (regulatory activities to be proportionate, consistent and targeted
only at cases in which action is needed, etc).’. This amendment replaces Clause 49(3), inserted by amendment in the House of Lords, with new subsections setting out the matters that the Board must have regard to when preparing policy statements pursuant to Clause 49(1) and (2) and imposing requirements as to the content of statements under Clause 49(1). Mr Henry Bellingham
251 # Clause 51, page 28, line 4, at end insert— ‘(2A) Practising fee income shall be kept separate from the other assets of a regulator.’. Mr Jonathan Djanogly
258 # Clause 54, page 30, line 21, at end insert— ‘(1A) An approved regulator must consider any request made by an external regulatory body for the approved regulator to reconsider any provision made by its regulatory arrangements on the grounds that the provision either— (a) conflicts with a requirement of a regulatory provision made by the external regulatory body, or (b) unnecessarily duplicates any regulatory provision made
by that external regulator.’. This amendment would bring parity between the different forms of conflict an approved regulator might face - either with external regulators or with approved regulators. Mr Henry Bellingham
252 # Clause 54, page 30, line 27, at end insert— ‘(2A) An external regulatory body may make an application to an approved regulator under this section if it considers that the arrangements of the approved regulator— (a) frustrate the exercise of the external regulatory body’s requirements, or (b) conflict with the external regulatory body’s regulatory requirements, or (c) give rise to unnecessary duplication of regulatory requirements for the subjects of the external regulatory body. (2B) For the purposes of subsection (2A)(c) above, “subjects” means any individuals or entities subject to the regulatory powers and jurisdication of the external regulator. (2C) Where an application is made to an approved regulator under this section, the approved regulator must— (a) determine whether such regulatory conflict exists with the external regulatory body’s requirements and, where it so determines, take such steps as are reasonably practicable to address the regulatory conflict outlined by the external regulatory body, or, (b) in the absence of satisfactory resolution and where provisions for the resolution of external regulatory conflict provide, make an application to the Board under subsection (4).’. Mr Henry Bellingham
253 # Clause 55, page 31, line 6, at end insert— ‘(d) shall give a reason and explanation for such notice.’. Simon Hughes
226 Clause 63, page 35, line 4, at
end insert ‘and, in either case, no other approved regulator is
suitable and willing to regulate the activity in question.’. To ensure that the Legal Services Board directly regulates the legal services only as a last resort, where there is no other approved regulator which could regulate the activity in question. Mr Jonathan Djanogly
268 # Clause 71, page 41, line 8, at end insert ‘, provided that a body is not a “licensable body” if the only managers who are non-authorised persons are individuals who do not directly provide any services to consumers.’. To ensure that a law firm or LLP will not become an ABS solely because it wishes to appoint as managers non-lawyer professionals. This will apply only if these appointees only provide services to their firms internally and do not directly provide services to clients of the firm. Bridget Prentice 111 Clause 72, page 41, line 10, leave out subsections (1) and (2) and insert— (a) is a manager of B, or (b) has an interest in B. (a) another body (“A”) is a manager of B, or has an interest in B, and (b) non-authorised persons are entitled to exercise, or control the exercise of, at least 10% of the voting rights in A. (a) the person holds shares in the body, or (b) the person is entitled to exercise, or control the exercise of, voting rights in the body. (2B) A body may be licensable by virtue of both subsection (1) and subsection (2). (2C) For the purposes of this Act, a non-authorised person has an indirect interest in a licensable body if the body is licensable by virtue of subsection (2) and the non-authorised person is entitled to exercise, or control the exercise of, voting rights in A.’. This amendment refines the definition of “licensable body”, by replacing the “interest in shares” test with an “interest” test (sub-paragraph (1)(b)) and the test in subsection (2). Subsection (2A) defines “interest”, and subsection (2C) defines non-authorised persons with an “indirect interest” in a body licensable because of subsection (2). Mr Jonathan Djanogly
257 # Clause 72, page 41, line 10, leave out subsection (1) and insert— ‘(1) For the purposes of this Act, a body is a “licensable body” if— (a) at least one manager of the body is an individual who is a non-authorised person who provides services directly or indirectly to clients; or (b) more than 25 per cent. of the managers of the body are individuals who are not authorised persons regardless of whether they provide services directly or indirectly to clients; or (c) at least one person who has an interest in shares in
the body is a non-authorised person and is not a manager of that body.’. Mr Jonathan Djanogly
259 # Clause 72, page 41, line 13, at end insert— ‘(1A) A body is not a
licensable body if it is regulated under section 9(A) of the Administration
of Justice Act 1985.’. This purpose of this amendment is to enable Legal Disciplinary Practices to be regulated under the Law Society’s ordinary regulatory regime providing at least three-quarters of their members are lawyers, they do not have external ownership and, any non-lawyer partners or members do not provide services direct to clients. Bridget Prentice 112 Clause 72, page 41, line 26, at end insert ‘, and references to the holding of shares, or to a shareholding, are to be construed accordingly.’. This amendment provides that references to the holding of shares or to a shareholding are to be construed in accordance with the definition of “shares” in section 72(3). Bridget Prentice 7 Clause 83, page 48, line 24, leave
out paragraph (e). This amendment reverses one made in the House of Lords requiring licensing rules to contain provision for specific attention to be paid to the likely effect on access to justice of each application by a body to be licensed under Part 5 of the Bill. Mr Jonathan Djanogly
211 Schedule 11, page 183, line 8, at end insert— ‘( ) Licensing rules may provide the fees to cover the whole cost to the licensing authority of dealing with the application, whether the application is granted or not.’. The amendment is intended to make it clear that licensing rules can put the whole cost of dealing with an application on the individual applicant, rather than leaving part to be borne by the licensing authority itself (and hence by other firms regulated by that licensing authority). Bridget Prentice 134 Schedule 11, page 189, line 43, leave out ‘an interest in shares in the body’ and insert ‘a shareholding in the licensed body, or a parent undertaking of the licensed body,’. This amendment is related to amendment 162 and reflects the changes made to paragraph 38(1)(a) of Schedule 13 by that amendment. Bridget Prentice 135 Schedule 11, page 189, line 44, at end insert— ‘( ) if the relevant licensing rules make the provision mentioned in paragraph 38(1)(aa) of that Schedule, a non-authorised person has under those rules an entitlement to exercise, or control the exercise of, voting rights in the licensed body or a parent undertaking of the licensed body which exceeds the voting limit,’. This amendment is related to amendment 163. It provides that where rules are made under the provision inserted by that amendment setting a voting limit, and that limit is breached, the licensing authority may suspend or revoke the licensed body’s licence. Bridget Prentice 136 Schedule 11, page 190, line 1, leave out ‘in which non-authorised persons have an interest’ and insert ‘or a parent undertaking of the licensed body held by non-authorised persons’. This amendment is related to amendment 164 and reflects the changes made to paragraph 38(1)(b) of Schedule 13 by that amendment. Bridget Prentice 137 Schedule 11, page 190, line 2, at end insert— ‘( ) if the relevant licensing rules make the provision mentioned in paragraph 38(1)(c) of that Schedule, the total proportion of voting rights in the licensed body or a parent undertaking of the licensed body which non-authorised persons are entitled to exercise, or control the exercise of, exceeds the limit specified in the rules.’. This amendment is related to amendment 165. It provides that where rules are made under the provision inserted by that amendment setting a limit on the total proportion of voting rights, and that limit is breached, the licensing authority may suspend or revoke the licensed body’s licence. Bridget Prentice 138 Schedule 12, page 191, line 24, leave out ‘a’ and insert ‘an independent’. This amendment is part of a set of amendments that change references to trade unions to independent trade unions, as defined in amendment 126. This amendment provides that the third ground (see paragraph 1(5)) for an application for a licence to the Board applies in relation to independent trade unions. Bridget Prentice 139 Schedule 12, page 193, line 24, leave out ‘in shares’. This amendment is related to amendment 111, which replaces the concept of “interest in shares” with “interest”. Bridget Prentice 140 Schedule 12, page 193, line 26, leave out ‘in shares’. This amendment is related to amendment 111, which replaces the concept of “interest in shares” with “interest”. Bridget Prentice 141 Schedule 12, page 193, line 29, leave out ‘in shares’. This amendment is related to amendment 111, which replaces the concept of “interest in shares” with “interest”. Bridget Prentice 142 Schedule 12, page 193, line 31, leave out ‘in shares’. This amendment is related to amendment 111, which replaces the concept of “interest in shares” with “interest”. Bridget Prentice 143 Schedule 12, page 193, line 32, at end insert— ‘( ) the kinds of non-authorised persons who have an indirect interest in the licensable body.’. This amendment is related to amendment 111, which introduces the concept of non-authorised persons with an “indirect interest”. Bridget Prentice 113 Clause 85, page 49, line 39, leave out ‘persons having an interest in shares,’ and insert ‘non-authorised persons having an interest or an indirect interest,’. This amendment is related to the replacement in amendment 111 of the “interest in shares” test. It also clarifies that it is only non-authorised persons who have an “interest” or “indirect interest” (or a material interest) against whom obligations under subsection (4) may be imposed. Bridget Prentice 144 Schedule 13, page 194, line 25, leave out ‘has an interest in’ and insert ‘holds’. This amendment is related to amendment 111. It amends the first test for a material interest by replacing the 10% interest in shares test with a 10% shareholding test. Bridget Prentice 145 Schedule 13, page 194, line 27, leave out ‘interest in shares’ and insert ‘shareholding’. This amendment is related to amendment 111. It amends the second test for a material interest by replacing the test of significant influence by virtue of an interest in shares with a test of significant influence by virtue of a shareholding. Bridget Prentice 146 Schedule 13, page 194, line 28, leave out ‘has an interest in’ and insert ‘holds’. This amendment is related to amendment 111. It amends the third test for a material interest by replacing the test of 10% interest in shares in a parent undertaking with a test of 10% shareholding in a parent undertaking. Bridget Prentice 147 Schedule 13, page 194, line 31, leave out ‘interest in shares’ and insert ‘shareholding’. This amendment is related to amendment 111. It amends the fourth test for a material interest by replacing the test of significant influence by virtue of an interest in shares in a parent undertaking with a test of significant influence by virtue of a shareholding in a parent undertaking. |
| |
| © Parliamentary copyright 2007 | Prepared: 11 June 2007 |