Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Gerry Sutcliffe (Labour) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 29 March 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Consumer Credit Bill 2005-06.


Consumer Credit Bill

I acknowledge the work done by citizens advice bureaux and other advice agencies. The hon. Gentleman will know of the Government’s intention to allow the financial inclusion fund to give advice face to face and of our wish to find ways of helping people early to deal with the debts that they incur. He also knows of the regulations following our consumer White Paper, which offer help and support. I am grateful to the industry for its work in offering mechanisms of support for people who find themselves in debt. I believe that we are all trying to achieve the same thing: transparent legislation that makes clear the responsibilities for both lender and borrower. However, we also want to do what we can to support the agencies that offer help. The hon. Gentleman will know of the ““loan shark hunter”” pilot schemes in Birmingham and Glasgow that offer advice to people who find themselves in debt to, and exploited to the limit by, the most horrendous members of society. We have listened to what has been said to us about irresponsible lending. I hope and expect that we shall gain the support of the Opposition parties, given that, during the variety of debates in which we engaged, it was clear that they wanted us to take this step. Lords amendment No. 4 is technical and would alter new section 36F(3) in clause 50 to ensure that the clause does what was originally intended. Clause 50 deals with officers of enforcement agencies other than the OFT. New section 36F(2) makes the OFT responsible for the actions of those officers while they are fulfilling their duties under section 36C of the 1974 Act, which deals with access to premises, and section 36D, which deals with access to premises under warrant. However, section 36F(3) disapplies section 36F(2) in the case of criminal proceedings against an officer of the enforcement authority. It does not currently mention the OFT and we believe that, for the sake of clarity, it should be specifically mentioned. The amendment clarifies the position as originally intended. Lords amendment No. 5 addresses a key recommendation of the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee, which reported on the Bill in October last year. The amendment makes an order under clause 68 subject to affirmative resolution in both Houses of Parliament, as opposed to negative resolution in either House. An order made under clause 68 can make changes to any other Act or piece of subordinate legislation that is necessary as a consequence of the Consumer Credit Act.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
444 c973-4 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Consumers Disadvantaged Credit agreements Credit Credit unions Licensing Loans Office of Fair Trading Money lenders Regulation
Legislation
Consumer Credit Bill 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk