Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Baroness Noakes (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 7 April 2010. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Financial Services Bill.


Financial Services Bill

My Lords, Clause 16 is not without difficulty. I regret the fact that the wash-up process has prevented us from debating the need for additional disciplinary powers in Clauses 14 to 17. That aside, we welcome Amendments 184A and 184B, which deal with the burden of proof in the use of the unusual new power in Clause 16 to go after people who perform controlled functions without approval. The Minister referred to the amendments that we tabled, but I believe that his amendments are somewhat better. We similarly welcome Amendments 201 and 202 as providing further protection to people caught up unwittingly in Clause 16. Amendment 194, as the Minister explained, reduces the limitation period from four years to three years. We regard this as a move in the right direction, but of course it does not go as far as our own amendment. That would have reduced the period to two years, which we continue to believe is more reasonable. We have a similar view on Amendment 204 in relation to Section 66, but this is half-loaf time and so these amendments get a half-welcome. Lastly, we welcome Amendment 205, which enables the publication of details of decision notices. It does not go as far as the amendment that we had tabled; none the less, it is welcome on consumer protection grounds.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
718 c1520 
Session
2009-10
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Disclosure of information Consumers Directors Bank services Banks Advisory services Credit cards Education Financial services Financial Services Authority Pay Regulation Council for Financial Stability Sunset clauses
Legislation
Financial Services Bill 2009-10
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk