Parliamentary Search

Proceeding contribution from Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay (Liberal Democrat) 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 wished to hear what the Minister and the noble Baroness, Lady Noakes, said on this amendment. As the Minister rightly points out, it is a matter of judgment. Having heard both arguments, we on these Benches feel that five years renewable is more sensible than the ““big bang”” decision of giving someone the job for eight years, when one may well regret it very shortly afterwards. Five years renewable is the choice given to the electorate. In America, presidents may be given eight years, but there is a review after four years, if I can put it that way. The case made by the Minister, I think, is right. Five years with one further term is the appropriate way to proceed.

Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
707 c145-6 
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