Proceeding contribution from Lord Myners (Labour) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 27 January 2009. It occurred during Debate on Pre-Budget Report.
Pre-Budget Report
My Lords, in discussion with colleagues I shall consider the merit of assisting the noble Lord in pursuit of that information. If my colleagues and I conclude that that would be a good and proper thing to do, I will write to him and ensure that a copy goes to the noble Lord, Lord Vinson, as I believe his interests are similar. I shall say little in response to the comments from the noble Lord, Lord Northbrook. As one of the later contributors, many of the things that one was going to say, or has said, have already been covered by others. I apologise for that and will limit myself to two comments that he made about banking, acknowledging that he is a scion of the Barings banking family and a known expert in this field. I think that he misunderstands the issue in respect of Northern Rock. A process of foreclosure on mortgages may well be right and appropriate—indeed, in the interests of the borrower when it is not possible for borrowers to continue to service their mortgages. That is rather different from what we are now saying, which is that we see the potential for Northern Rock to be used as a vehicle to provide additional funding for house purchases—for good quality new borrowing. He also asked whether I thought that the Swedish and UBS models were useful. I think that they are. We certainly reviewed them in considerable detail before we concluded that an asset protection programme, which is sometimes described by the media incorrectly as insurance, was better than a whole purchase of assets—the good bank, bad bank model—that lies behind the Swedish and UBS precedents. I shall have to consult colleagues on whether the noble Lord, Lord Pearson of Rannoch, used unparliamentary language, but his contribution was entirely predictable. My answer to the questions on withholding contributions and on the issue of audit will be no different from that of my colleagues when asked those questions previously by members of UKIP. I covered this matter in some depth when I answered Question in this House from my noble friend Lady Cohen. However, as it was my first or possibly second day in this Chamber, I was frozen with fear and doubt whether my answers were as coherent as they should have been. If I reread Hansard and feel that I can improve my answer in any way, I shall do that by writing to the noble Lord, to whom I give way.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 707 c239-40
- Session
- 2008-09
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Banks Credit Borrowing Fiscal policy Government assistance Financial markets Economic policy Public expenditure Loans Monetary policy Public finance Public sector debt Small businesses Taxation VAT Economic recession Stability and Growth Pact Pre-Budget report 2008
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2025-01-22 21:08:40 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_523236
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_523236
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_523236