Previous Section Back to Table of Contents Lords Hansard Home Page



("( ) If the Authority makes an order under subsection (1), it must give written notice of the order to the applicant.").

On Question, amendment agreed to.

[Amendment No. 254C not moved.]

Clause 236, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 237 agreed to.

Clause 238 [Procedure when refusing an application]:

Lord McIntosh of Haringey moved Amendments Nos. 254D to 254F:



    Page 122, line 12, leave out ("against the refusal").


    Page 122, line 14, leave out subsection (3).

The noble Lord said: I spoke to these amendments in the debate on Clause 188 stand part. I beg to move.

On Question, amendments agreed to.

Clause 238, as amended, agreed to.

Clauses 239 to 243 agreed to.

Clause 244 [Alteration of schemes and changes of manager or trustee]:

[Amendment No. 254G not moved.]

Lord McIntosh of Haringey moved Amendment No. 254H:


    Page 125, line 24, after ("Authority") insert (", by written notice,").

The noble Lord said: I spoke to this amendment in the debate on Clause 188 stand part. I beg to move.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Clause 244, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 245 [Procedure when refusing approval of change of manager or trustee]:

Lord McIntosh of Haringey moved Amendments Nos. 254J and 254K:


    Page 125, line 43, leave out ("refuses") and insert ("decides to refuse").


    Page 126, line 2, leave out subsection (5).

The noble Lord said: I spoke to these amendments in the debate on Clause 188 stand part. I beg to move.

Lord Elton: Perhaps I am confused; however, I have the groupings list before me which indicates that Amendments Nos. 254H, 255J and 255K are a separate group. I take it that when the noble Lord says that the amendments were spoken to in relation to Clause 188 stand part, they were caught up, as it were, in spite of the published list. Am I right?

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: I am afraid that there is a mistake in the groupings. The group to which the noble Lord refers should in fact be Amendments Nos. 255H, 255J and 255K which are position amendments in Clause 277. If we were responsible for that, I am sorry.

Lord Jenkin of Roding: I am sure that the noble Lord was not responsible. If he was, we certainly accept his apologies. I find it extraordinarily difficult, going through the groupings list with such a complicated

30 Mar 2000 : Column 958

system of letters--sometimes three letters after three numbers--to get them all straight in my mind and mark them in the Bill. I cannot help feeling that there must be a better way of doing this. It is astonishingly confusing. If there is only one mistake in the groupings list, that says a great deal about the skill of the Public Bill Office in dealing with these very difficult matters.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: I do not think that it was the Public Bill Office. It was probably those of us in the department who proposed the grouping wrongly. I think that the numbering itself was correct. I have a knock-down argument against the argument against all these government amendments, but I am not going to waste it now.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Lord Saatchi moved Amendment No. 254KA:


    Page 126, line 3, at end insert--


("( ) If both the trustee and the manager are given a warning or decision notice, neither of them is to be treated as a third party for the purposes of section 375(2) or 376(2).").

The noble Lord said: We had thought that it might not be necessary to move this amendment in view of later government Amendments Nos. 275L and 275M which propose new clauses setting out the procedure regarding third party rights. However, we have had another look at the new clauses and we believe that it may be necessary after all to table amendments to the new clause introduced by Amendment No. 275L to achieve the effect that intended by our Amendment No. 252KA. That is because there is still a mismatch between the procedures described in Clause 245, which is the proposal to refuse replacement of the manager or trustee, and Clause 248, which deals with the proposal to revoke an authorisation order.

The new clause to be introduced by the Government in Amendment No. 275L will apply to warning and decision notices given in accordance with Clause 248 but, as we read it, will not apply to warning and decision notices given in accordance with Clause 245. I am aware that this is a technical matter. Nevertheless, we should like to understand it better. The provisions relate to the procedures regarding third parties when separate warning notices are given to the manager and trustee of a unit trust scheme. It is not completely clear why the procedure on refusing to replace a manager or trustee should be different from that relating to revocation of authorisation. It may be necessary to table amendments to the new clause on Report, to add references to Clause 245(2) in respect of warning notices, and to Clause 245(4) in respect of decision notices.

Is this the appropriate time to debate Amendment No. 254S?

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: My understanding is that Amendment No. 254KA was debated in the group relating to Clause 188. It is certainly the case that Amendment No. 254S was debated then. I do not have a brief for Amendment No. 254KA, so I ask the noble Lord to give me a rain check. I will advise him before

30 Mar 2000 : Column 959

Report--not as to what he should do but whether there is an issue to which he may feel it necessary to refer on Report.

Lord Saatchi: I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause 245, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 246 agreed to.

Clause 247 [Revocation of authorisation order otherwise than by consent]:

[Amendments Nos. 254L and 254M not moved.]

Clause 247 agreed to.

Clause 248 [Procedure]:

Lord McIntosh of Haringey moved Amendment No. 254N:


    Page 126, line 41, leave out from ("Tribunal") to end of line 2 on page 127.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Clause 248, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 249 [Requests for revocation of authorisation order]:

Lord McIntosh of Haringey moved Amendments Nos. 254P to 254R:


    Page 127, line 4, at end insert--


("( ) If the Authority makes an order under subsection (1), it must give written notice of the order to the manager and trustee of the scheme concerned.").
Page 127, line 14, leave out ("refuses") and insert ("decides to refuse").


    Page 127, line 16, leave out from ("Tribunal") to end of line 18.

On Question, amendments agreed to.

Clause 249, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 250 [Directions]:

[Amendments Nos. 254RA and 254RB not moved.]

Clause 250 agreed to.

Clause 251 agreed to.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey moved Amendment No. 245S:


    After Clause 251, insert the following new clause--

PROCEDURE ON GIVING DIRECTIONS UNDER SECTION 250 AND VARYING THEM ON AUTHORITY"S OWN INITIATIVE

(".--(1) A direction takes effect--
(a) immediately, if the notice given under subsection (3) states that that is the case;
(b) on such date as may be specified in the notice; or
(c) if no date is specified in the notice, when the matter to which it relates is no longer open to review.
(2) A direction may be expressed to take effect immediately (or on a specified date) only if the Authority, having regard to the ground on which it is exercising its power under section 250, considers that it is necessary for the direction to take effect immediately (or on that date).

30 Mar 2000 : Column 960


(3) If the Authority proposes to give a direction under section 250, or gives such a direction with immediate effect, it must give separate written notice to the manager and the trustee of the scheme concerned.
(4) The notice must--
(a) give details of the direction;
(b) inform the person to whom it is given of when the direction takes effect;
(c) state the Authority's reasons for giving the direction and for its determination as to when the direction takes effect;
(d) inform the person to whom it is given that he may make representations to the Authority within such period as may be specified in it (whether or not he has referred the matter to the Tribunal); and
(e) inform him of his right to refer the matter to the Tribunal.
(5) The Authority may extend the period allowed under the notice for making representations.
(6) If, having considered any representations made by a person to whom the notice was given, the Authority decides--
(a) to give the direction in the way proposed, or
(b) if it has been given, not to revoke the direction,
it must give separate written notice to the manager and the trustee of the scheme concerned.
(7) If, having considered any representations made by a person to whom the notice was given, the Authority decides--
(a) not to give the direction in the way proposed,
(b) to give the direction in a way other than that proposed, or
(c) to revoke a direction which has effect,
it must give separate written notice to the manager and the trustee of the scheme concerned.
(8) A notice given under subsection (6) must inform the person to whom it is given of his right to refer the matter to the Tribunal.
(9) A notice under subsection (7)(b) must comply with subsection (4).
(10) If a notice informs a person of his right to refer a matter to the Tribunal, it must give an indication of the procedure on such a reference.
(11) This section applies to the variation of a direction on the Authority's own initiative as it applies to the giving of a direction.").

The noble Lord said: This was debated with Clause 188 stand part. I beg to move.


Next Section Back to Table of Contents Lords Hansard Home Page