Report comment

I think there is a greater concern. In the new version of the Internal Governance Rules LSB are strongly promoting the role of the "approved regulator" (the Law Society) as one of "assurance" only NOT "oversight" which the LSB reserve to themselves. (Who is to be "assured", by what means, and of what, remains obscure) but if the LSB and the SRA are to be entitled to decline to reveal details of their conversations / meetings to the Approved Regulator about important matters of governance (decision-making on the Leigh Day case in this instance) then it looks as though that "assurance" process will be as meaningless as, presumably, the LSB intended it should be?