---

Banking Bill

I thank the Minister for an extraordinarily comprehensive reply to my modest set of amendments. I do not accept that, just because the Bank is not directly accountable to Parliament, Parliament has no right to know how the extraordinarily extensive powers being set up by the Bill are exercised in practice. That is what lies behind my amendments. On Amendments 51 and 76, I accept that the inability of the bank to argue its case makes the negative resolution procedure on share transfer orders potentially not quite right. However, there are examples where Ministers produce statutory instruments to obtain approval for documents which they have not themselves prepared. One example that comes to mind—it is not on all fours with this case, but it is an example—is the Audit Commission’s code of practice, which has to be put to Parliament under the affirmative resolution procedure. Although the Secretary of State does not prepare that document, he has to put it before Parliament. So we are not in unprecedented territory, although we do not need to argue that point. I take the Government’s assurance that they will always inform Parliament as rapidly as possible and that Amendment 52, while nice, is not necessary. That leaves Amendment 50, on informing Parliament. The Minister has offered the parliamentary accountability of the Bank of England through the Treasury Select Committee in another place. That is the only way in which the Bank has any effective accountability to Parliament. It depends on the Bank fitting in with the Treasury Select Committee’s timetable and the topics that it wishes to examine. It is not about Parliament generally, and certainly not about your Lordships' House. The Minister expressed sympathy and said that he would consider between now and Report whether, as I believe, there is a case to be made for Parliament being informed. That is the mechanism for Parliament to decide what it wishes to do. The Treasury Select Committee in another place might wish to examine the issue, or your Lordships' House or another place might wish to initiate some other kind of debate on the subject. It is important not to eliminate Parliament from formal knowledge of the use of the very extensive powers in this Bill. I am a little encouraged by what the Minister has said. I think that we should return to this on Report, and I would prefer it if he produced an amendment. With that, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment 50 withdrawn. Amendment 51 not moved. Clause 24 agreed. Clause 25: Procedure: orders Amendment 52 not moved. Clause 25 agreed.