Proceeding contribution from Lord Mackay of Clashfern (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 3 February 2009. It occurred during Debate on bill on Banking Bill.
Banking Bill
My Lords, could the noble Lord explain further how this would work? If the first order is fully implemented at the time of its being turned down by Parliament, paragraph (c) keeps all that has happened in place as lawful. If you come along with a new order, are you undermining or cancelling what has already been done, or is it only valuable to have this power if there is something still to be done under the old order which has not yet been fully completed?
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 707 c578
- Session
- 2008-09
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Disclosure of information Compensation Consumers Accountability Audit Assets Debts Bank services Banks Delegated legislation Advisory services Bank of England Finance Liability Financial institutions Insolvency Government assistance Financial Services Authority Holding companies Protection Payments Public interest Public sector Public expenditure Parliamentary scrutiny Loans Post offices Post Office Nationalisation Regulation Rural areas Treasury Financial Services Compensation Scheme National Loans Fund Financial Stability Committee Sunset clauses Retrospective legislation
- Legislation
- Banking Bill 2007-08 to 2008-09
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 09:31:55 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_526198
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_526198
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_526198