COMMONS AMENDMENTS (Hansard, 24 October 1990)

§ The Lord Chancellor
My Lords, I beg to move that the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 163 and 164 , en bloc. These two items in the amendments to the interpretation clause cannot be conveniently grouped elsewhere. Amendment No. 163 is a purely drafting amendment and deletes the unnecessary reference to an arbitrator or an umpire as being a species of court. Your Lordships will remember that my noble and learned friend the Master of the Rolls drew attention to this matter in discussion of an amendment during the passage of the Bill through this House.
Amendment No. 164 defines "member" in such a way as to enable the term to be used to denote members of a profession who are subject to the regulatory power and authority of a relevant professional body even though they are not members of that body itself; for example, the General Council of the Bar. That is a good example as not all members of the Bar are members of the general council, but they are subject to the power and authority of that body. This amendment is required to recognise the way in which solicitors, for example, are regulated by the Law Society. It is of relevance to a number of provisions in the Bill.
Moved, That the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 163 and 164. —(The Lord Chancellor.)

§ Lord Renton
My Lords, I understand Amendment No. 164 a little better, having listened to the speech of my noble and learned friend the Lord Chancellor.
1465 However, the amendment involves a rather complicated internal series of cross-references. We are amending the definition of "member". We have to find out what is meant by a body that is established by the Act. In order to do that, one naturally looks to the words "authorised body" which are mentioned higher up on page 66 in the definition clause. That refers to Sections 25 and 26 of the Act we are discussing. There we find references to the Bar Council and the Law Society. However, various other bodies not mentioned in the Bill, will have the right to apply for certain rights under the Bill, including rights of audience. I wonder whether such bodies are to be included in the phrase, any body established by this Act". I find that a little puzzling. I wonder whether my noble and learned friend can enlighten me.

§ The Lord Chancellor
My Lords, I hope I can. The words, any body established by this Act refer to, for example, the Lord Chancellor's advisory committee on education, training and conduct, and to the authorised practitioners' board. I am glad to say that the Bar Council does not constitute a body that is established by this Act. However, authority may be given to it under the Act. The Law Society is not a body established by the Act. Its establishment occurred much earlier. The purpose of this measure is to provide a general definition which will apply to all bodies which are likely to be authorised under the Act, or which may apply for authorisation.
However, we had to make an exception for the bodies set up under the Bill, such as the Authorised Conveyancing Practitioners Board, because in that context we are talking only about those who are members of the board and not those who may be subject to its discipline.

§ Lord Renton
My Lords, I should like to say that I am grateful to my noble and learned friend for that explanation. However, he may find that administratively it may be as well for his department to give some guidance so that the way back through the Bill can easily be found.

§ The Lord Chancellor
My Lords, I shall certainly consider that suggestion. On reading the Bill as a whole, that is the route along which one would be led. However, we shall certainly consider whether we can lead people more gently and more clearly.