Parliamentary Search

Proceeding contribution from Lord Howard of Rising (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Monday, 2 February 2009. It occurred during Debate on bill on Banking Bill.

Banking Bill

My Lords, I thank the noble Lord, Lord Newby, for his support for the amendment. I do not see how the amendment could be construed as confusing. The Minister repeated the same arguments and I am afraid that they are no more convincing this time around than they were the last time. Compensation will never be quite the same as giving someone or something proper consideration in the first place. Compensation is a remedy for something that has been done that should not have been done. It would be much better for provision to be in place for the action not to happen in the first place. That may sound rather convoluted. If consideration had been given in the first place, there would be no need to claim compensation. For that reason, it would be desirable to include that in the Bill. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment 5 withdrawn.

Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
707 c496 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Disclosure of information Compensation Codes of practice Consumers Accountability Directors Assets Bank services Banks Competition Delegated legislation Advisory services Building societies Bank of England Finance Human rights EU law Financial institutions Insolvency Government assistance Financial Services Authority Private sector Protection Pay Public appointments Pensions Public interest Property transfer Mergers Parliamentary scrutiny Pension funds Pension rights Nationalisation Regulation Shares Valuation Taxation Shareholders Treasury UK Financial Investments Financial Services Compensation Scheme Northern Rock Bradford and Bingley Hampton, Philip
Legislation
Banking Bill 2007-08 to 2008-09
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk