Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Viscount Eccles (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Monday, 19 January 2009. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Banking Bill.


Banking Bill

I have tabled this probing amendment in an attempt to understand why we need monitors. In the proposed system, there will be an appointing person, an independent valuer, his staff and monitors, and overall, and at every stage subject to the drafting of the secondary legislation, the Treasury. It all sounds very expensive. Are there precedents for monitors of remuneration and/or compensation schemes, and, if so, in what circumstances? Has the requisite work been done to estimate the cost of all this? For example, judging from a previous debate, a tender might be put out in the search for a valuer and, if so, his remuneration will be set out in a contract. What would the monitor’s responsibilities be and who would the monitor be? I suppose that it could be a Treasury official but I guess from previous debates that that is not the intention. Perhaps the monitors are to be chosen, following another tendering procedure, from the private sector. Can we have a fuller explanation of the need for monitors? I beg to move.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
706 c1482 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Disclosure of information Compensation Codes of practice Assets Bank services Banks Competition Delegated legislation Bank of England Capital Liability Financial services Financial institutions Insolvency Financial Services Authority Private sector Property transfer Public sector Mergers Nationalisation Scotland Small businesses Valuation Treasury
Legislation
Banking Bill 2007-08 to 2008-09
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk