COMMONS AMENDMENT (Hansard, 22 July 1986)

§ Lord Cameron of Lochbroom
My Lords, I beg to move that this House do agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 4. Your Lordships will recollect that we had a lively discussion in this House on the guidance power in this clause. That discussion was continued in another place. As the Government have frequently made clear, guidance is intended to cover such matters as financial procedures, but there is no intention that it should affect the consideration or disposal of applications. However, the Government accepted in another place that this point could be made clearer, and this is the purpose of the new subsection (4A) of Clause 3. The new subsection does two things. First, it says in terms that any guidance given by the Secretary of State cannot affect the consideration or disposal of applications in general, as well as individual applications for legal aid or advice and assistance. Secondly, it says that guidance cannot affect consideration or disposal of supplementary or incidental applications to the board. This would prevent the Secretary of State giving guidance on such matters as the circumstances in which the board should agree to the employment of counsel. I beg to move.

The Earl of Selkirk
My Lords, I am grateful to my noble and learned friend for this amendment. It may have made no difference, but it has clearly outlined points made in this House as to what is, I am sure, the right approach to the problems that lie before the board. It would be intolerable if the Secretary of State were to decide issues of principle in individual cases of legal aid. It would be quite wrong. This makes it abundantly clear that that is not the intention. I thank my noble and learned friend.

§ Lord Elwyn-Jones
My Lords, this touches upon a theme that we discussed previously. I agree with what has just been said. Valuable and important as the Secretary of State is, this is a matter for the profession, above all others, to determine.