Proceeding contribution from Lord Myners (Labour) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 13 January 2009. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Banking Bill.
Banking Bill
We will have to move on fairly soon, but this is a subject of considerable interest to me, so I am probably allowing myself to be drawn into it more willingly than my colleagues might suggest that I should be. There is a pressing need to strengthen the board of directors of a number of UK financial institutions. In cases where the Government have invested, UKFI, under the chairmanship of Sir Philip Hampton, the chairman of Sainsbury, and the leadership of its chief executive, John Kingman, is actively engaged to work with boards of directors to strengthen them through new appointments. I would not want those new appointments to be described or understood as being government appointments. I believe that the Liberal Democrat party and the Official Opposition support the concept of a unitary board in which the board is responsible to all shareholders. The concept of having directors who sit around the board table to speak for one shareholder to the disregard of others and who potentially take instruction from outside the boardroom or impart information from the boardroom back to one shareholder is alien to our core beliefs about corporate governance and correct practice. However, stronger boards we need. In the case of the Royal Bank of Scotland in particular, several directors, including the chairman, have indicated their intention to leave the board. Therefore, those boards, their major shareholders and UKFI need to work together to make first-class appointments. Finally, I add that those appointments should not necessarily be wholly and exclusively people with banking experience because, as the noble Lord, Lord Newby, said, and as was covered in an earlier debate in this House on the subject, we need to ensure that other issues such as technology and customer focus are appropriately represented around the board table. I now suggest that we move on. Clause 4 agreed. Clause 5: Code of practice Clause 5: Code of practice Amendments 15 and 16 not moved.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 706 c1167-8
- Session
- 2008-09
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Disclosure of information Codes of practice Accountability Administration Assets Bank services Banks Credit unions Building societies Bank of England Deposits Financial institutions Insolvency Legislation Government assistance Financial Services Authority Financial markets Foreign companies Protection Public sector Public expenditure Nationalisation Terrorism Regulation Shareholders Treasury Financial Services Compensation Scheme Northern Rock Freezing of assets
- Legislation
- Banking Bill 2007-08 to 2008-09
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-01-26 18:45:54 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_517780
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_517780
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_517780