Proceeding contribution from Christopher Chope (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Friday, 19 October 2007. It occurred during Debate on bill on Building Societies (Funding) and Mutual Societies (Transfers) Bill.
Building Societies (Funding) and Mutual Societies (Transfers) Bill
We are talking about hypotheses. If my hon. Friend does not think that any group would have a locus standi to petition in the event that a hybrid instrument had been deemed, there would be no harm in allowing the hybrid instrument procedure, because it would not make any difference. Perhaps neither my hon. Friend nor I are wise enough to know exactly what is behind all this, but paragraph 6 is phrased as it is because somebody thinks that private interests might well be prejudiced as a result of the procedure. Under the hybrid instrument procedure, those interests would have a right to petition in the other place and ““they”” might wish—I do not know who ““they”” would be—to preclude that right or opportunity from those aggrieved petitioners.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 464 c1085
- Session
- 2006-07
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Channel Islands Fees and charges Insurance companies Isle of Man Financial Services Authority Mergers Mutual societies Subsidiary companies European economic area
- Legislation
- Building Societies (Funding) and Mutual Societies (Transfers) Bill 2006-07
- Financial Mutuals Arrangements Bill 2006-07
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 12:03:33 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_418355
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_418355
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_418355