HC Deb 05 June 2000 vol 351 c46

Lords amendment: No. 9, in page 7, line 8, leave out subsection (4).

The Financial Secretary to the Treasury (Mr. Stephen Timms)

I beg to move, That this House agrees with the Lords in the said amendment.

Mr. Deputy Speaker

With this we may discuss Lords amendments Nos. 189, 211 to 227, 229 to 233, 265, 266, 269, 314 to 325, 374, 551, 565 and 652.

Mr. Timms

The main effect of the amendments is to rationalise the treatment in the Bill of legal professional privilege and to strengthen it. The changes are, in part, a response to concerns raised by the Opposition in Committee about the fact that privilege might not be adequately protected in all cases. Therefore, the amendments bring the Bill's definition of legal professional privilege into line with the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984. I believe that they will be broadly welcomed.

At the same time, the amendments consolidate existing provisions of the Bill into a single clause that extends to all the information and document-gathering powers in the Bill. The existing, separate provisions that prevent different powers being used to require a person to disclose or permit the inspection of material that is subject to legal professional privilege are, therefore, made redundant and omitted.

The amendments also simplify the drafting of clause 159 and other clauses in part XI that deal with the investigation powers of the FSA, and they align the investigation powers under part XVII in respect of collective investment schemes with the main provisions in part XI. I believe that all those amendments will be welcome and I urge the House to agree to them.

Lords amendment agreed to.

Forward to