---

Banking Bill

Clause 203: Saving for informal oversight Debate on whether Clause 203 should stand part of the Bill. We oppose Clause 203 standing part of the Bill, in order to understand what is intended by it. It is headed ““Saving for informal oversight””, though it refers not to informal oversight but to ““having dealings””. That is not the most elegant of terms but it implies contractual or other relationships rather than oversight. Will the Minister say what sort of ““dealings”” the Government are seeking to legitimise with this clause? Can the Minister also say way why the clause is necessary? I searched the Financial Services and Markets Act for an equivalent provision in relation to the FSA. I could find nothing in the FSMA which said that the FSA can have dealings with the bodies it subjects to formal regulation. If the FSA does not need to have statutory cover for informal dealings with its regulatees, why does the Bank? As usual, the Explanatory Notes gave no additional insight, so I was forced to table this clause stand part. I look forward to enlightenment.