---

Banking Bill

My Lords, I do not come to the same conclusion as the noble Lord but I certainly follow him in terms of his objectives. If the noble Lord wanted an earnest of the Government’s intent, he will see the extent to which we have already provided for important parts of the review process within the legislation. He mentioned the Banking Liaison Panel and he will know that it will have an important role in advising the Treasury in due course as to what changes are needed to legislation under Parts 1 to 3 of the Bill. That is an important dimension, given the fact that the work that is being done on the provisional panel is already appreciated. Within the framework of this legislation we create the permanent role of the Banking Liaison Panel and review is clearly part of its objective. The past terms of remit allow it to give advice about the secondary legislation under Parts 1 to 3 the Bill. We tabled amendments, which we debated yesterday, to expand the role of the Banking Liaison Panel. Thus the panel will be able to keep under review important aspects of the special resolution review which, of course, has been the nub of very significant debate today and it forms a very important part of the Bill. I hear what the noble Lord says about the review having to be independent. I do not necessarily wish to undermine the procedures which are already in place for independent scrutiny of the secondary legislation under the special resolution review—the Banking Liaison Panel. In determining the detail of the appropriate review mechanism, we will also need to cater to the fact that much of the information and analysis which will be germane to this issue will be extremely technical and sensitive. That will be doubly the case if the review is also to consider any exercise of the special resolution powers in relation to a particular institution during the review period. We will need to consider carefully how best to ensure that the review is conducted by a person with appropriate expertise to assess such material. We will also need appropriate mechanisms to protect confidentiality. The issue is not as simple and straightforward as the noble Lord suggests. We are conscious that reviewing crucial parts of the legislation is important and have already written into the Bill specified provisions. I have no doubt that he will continue to press the concept of the general review, but I hope that he will recognise that the Government are intent on ensuring that the legislation is subject to review. If we need in due course to extend the scope of the review, we will take steps to do so. However, I hope that he will recognise that there is not a great deal of difference between us in his search for a more general review and the rather more specific and carefully thought through provisions that already obtain in the Bill, which of course I commend to the House. On that basis, I hope that he will feel that he can withdraw the amendment.