Parliamentary Search

Proceeding contribution from Lord Higgins (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 have much sympathy with my noble friend’s view. Why is there any need to have all of this in statute, unless it is in some sense to hive off responsibility from the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Treasury and onto the Bank of England, in the same way as the Government sought to do with the Monetary Policy Committee? The Bill specifies in minute detail exactly what the membership is and the extent to which the FSA and the Bank are represented, and then it specifies in particular that the Treasury shall not have a responsibility in this matter but only a consultative role. I am not happy about the way in which the body is being set up. It seems unnecessary to be so specific in statute.

Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
707 c114 
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