text_body: --- DIVISION TITLE ---
  
  <a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200405/cmbills/018/05018.i-vii.html">Constitutional Reform Bill</a> - <a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200405/cmbills/018/05018.1-4.html#j6001"> Clause 3</a> - Legal qualifications
  
  --- MOTION EFFECT ---
  
  
  <p>Those voting No deleted <a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200405/cmbills/018/05018.1-4.html#j6001"> Clause 3</a> of the 
  <a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200405/cmbills/018/05018.i-vii.html">Constitutional Reform Bill</a>, which said:</p>
  
  <p class="indent">(1)   A person is not qualified to be appointed Lord Chancellor unless he has at any time (a) held high judicial office for a period of at least 2 years; or (b) practised as a qualifying practitioner (as defined in <a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200405/cmbills/018/05018.10-13.html#j106">section 22</a>) for at 5 least 12 years. </p>
  
  <p>By removing this section, the qualifications for becoming Lord Chancellor is no different to that of any other Minister.</p>
  
  
  --- COMMENTS AND NOTES ---
  
  ie no qualifications whatsoever.  
  
  
  <p><i>Question put,</i> That the clause stand part of the Bill:&#8212;</p>
  
  <p><i>The Committee divided:</i> Ayes 126, Noes 272.</p>
  