Proceeding contribution from Lord Stewartby (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Monday, 26 January 2009. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Banking Bill.
Banking Bill
I was taken rather by surprise by subsection (3) as it is not immediately apparent for whose benefit it is included. Is it to protect the Treasury or the Bank of England? What lies behind it? If the Minister says that the amendment is not needed, presumably that will be because the thinking behind subsection (3) copes with questions of whose interest is at stake, but it does not leap off the page. Will the noble Lord explain for whose benefit or protection the subsection should remain in the Bill?
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 707 c38
- Session
- 2008-09
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Disclosure of information Compensation Codes of practice Audit Assets Debts Bank services Banks Delegated legislation Bank of England Bank notes Deposits Credit rating Housing Finance Fees and charges Liability EU law Investment Financial institutions Insolvency European communities Government assistance Financial Services Authority Financial markets Foreign companies Private sector Membership Public expenditure Property Parliamentary scrutiny Loans Post offices Monetary policy Statistics Regulation Stocks and shares Valuation Treasury Financial Services Compensation Scheme National Loans Fund Northern Rock Financial Stability Committee Sunset clauses
- Legislation
- Banking Bill 2007-08 to 2008-09
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-16 21:29:14 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_522534
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_522534
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_522534