Proceeding contribution from Lord Turnbull (Crossbench) 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
Like the noble Lord, Lord Higgins, I do not understand why, if something is urgent under proposed subsection (4) of Amendment 174, it then also has to have anonymity under proposed subsection (5). There may be circumstances in which anonymity, secrecy or delayed release of the information is justified but it should not apply in every case in which the urgency condition has been invoked.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 707 c66
- 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
- 2024-04-22 01:01:14 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_522600
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_522600
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_522600