Proceeding contribution from Ian Pearson (Labour) in the House of Commons on Monday, 25 January 2010. It occurred during Debate on bill on Financial Services Bill.
Financial Services Bill
I have already explained why such a power is unnecessary. The FSA can provide the information already. I am also concerned that the proposals might give rise to a system of parallel regulators, which is highly undesirable. They could create confusion for firms regarding who is responsible for supervising them and lead to the duplication of burdens, because both authorities could go to the same firm for the same information at different times. There are some powerful arguments why new clause 12 would be unhelpful.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 504 c632-3
- Session
- 2009-10
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Contracts Devolved matters Consumers Debts Bank services Banks Competition Cheques Credit agreements Credit Credit unions Building societies Bank of England Direct selling Credit cards Fees and charges EU law Financial services Financial institutions Exemptions Financial Services Authority Interest rates Financial markets Low incomes Northern Ireland Protection Pay Loans Office of Fair Trading Pension funds Registration Regulation Shares Unfair practices Council for Financial Stability
- Legislation
- Financial Services Bill 2009-10
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 19:45:52 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_614498
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_614498
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_614498