§ Lord BensonMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
The Question was as follows:
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether, in considering any applications from additional accountancy bodies for authority to conduct audits under Section 161(1)(a) of the Companies Act 1948, they propose to abide by the principles set out in the letter from the Department of Trade and Industry dated 12th September 1975 to the then presidents of the existing authorised bodies, and, if not, why those principles are no longer considered necessary for the protection of the public.
§ The Secretary of State for Trade (Lord Cockfield)My Lords, the letter to which the noble Lord refers starts with the statement that,
we will, of course, deal with every application on its merits ".This is what we propose doing. So far as the other issues raised by the noble Lord are concerned, I am giving the matter careful consideration and will write to the noble Lord in due course.
§ Lord BensonMy Lords, I am most grateful to the noble Lord for that information. May I ask the noble Lord whether it might be helpful to have discussions with the recognised bodies, because I am sure that, if they were to take place, some reasonable agreement could be reached on this difficult problem?
§ Lord CockfieldMy Lords, I will certainly bear in mind the suggestion that the noble Lord makes. But I think that the best course would be for him to give me the opportunity of going into the matter in detail, and I will let him know what conclusion I come to as to the course that we should follow.
§ Lord WigoderMy Lords, is it still the current policy of the Government that no new body will be recognised until a substantial majority of its members match the existing standards of the bodies so far recognised?
§ Lord CockfieldMy Lords, this is one of the points to which consideration needs to be given.
§ Lord ChorleyMy Lords, I hope that the existing bodies can take some comfort from the reply of the noble Lord the Minister. But is the noble Lord aware that, if his Answer is what I take it to be, it should be of some help in the United Kingdom profession in, 402 to take just one instance, its negotiations with its sister organisations in the EEC, which have the object of securing practising rights in the EEC countries? Would he accept that a rather fuller and more explicit statement of support by the Government in due course for the standards set by the existing recognised bodies would, by removing any lingering doubts or ambiguities, also be desirable? Would he not agree that objectives such as this one are very much in the public interest?
§ Lord CockfieldMy Lords, I am aware that strong feelings are held on this matter. This is why I say that I will give it very full and careful consideration.
§ Lord Harmar-NichollsMy Lords, is my noble friend aware that the exchanges have shown that there is something of some importance in this Question and Answer? I have not been able to understand what it is all about and, since my noble friend has said that he will write a letter to the noble Lord, could those of us who are not able to interpret the historic exchange that has taken place have a copy of it as well?
§ Lord CockfieldMy Lords, the matter is of importance, which is why I promised to give it careful consideration. So far as the rest of my noble friend's question is concerned, I will certainly ensure that the views that the Government come to are made widely known.
§ Lord LeatherlandMy Lords, did I hear correctly that the noble Lord accused the noble Lord the Minister of hypocrisy? If so, may I dissociate myself from such an accusation?
§ Lord CockfieldMy Lords, I am absolutely certain that my noble friend was not accusing me of any such thing, and I would be horrified to believe that the noble Lord himself harboured any such unkind thoughts.