Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Tunnicliffe (Labour) in the House of Lords on Monday, 12 December 2011. It occurred during Debates on delegated legislation on Open-Ended Investment Companies (Amendment) Regulations 2011.


Open-Ended Investment Companies (Amendment) Regulations 2011

My Lords, I make it clear from the outset that we support this order. I am looking forward to the Minister’s answer to the noble Lord’s questions about how the regulations fit in with the EU—questions which are particularly apposite at this moment. I will content myself with a few comments on the impact assessment and two or three questions. The impact assessment is absolutely fascinating. From my reading of it—and I am happy to be corrected here—the net benefit of the regulations will be between £18 million and £360 million, which is a pretty wide range that will involve lots of sums to prove that. The only point that I feel I can take from the impact assessment is that, in all credible scenarios, the introduction of a protected cell regime will be favourable, and I think that we can all be satisfied with that. I have just a few questions. First, new Regulation 11A(4) provides for an exception, which is referred to in the Explanatory Note. However, for myself I cannot quite see what sorts of transactions or assets the exception refers to. Like all exceptions, one is always slightly worried that the exception ends up negating the intent of the order. I am sure that it does not, but I pose that question for assurance. Secondly, as I understand it—once again, I could be wrong—there will be a period in which PCR products and non-PCR products will be on sale at the same time. I may have misunderstood that, but if I am right in that assumption, what actions are the Government taking to ensure that there is no confusion in the marketplace during that period of overlap? I will be happy if there is no period of overlap, but if there is one then it is important that we do not introduce confusion through these very sensible regulations. Finally, I like reading impact assessments, which is a little burden that I have to carry. The wonderful thing about impact assessments is that I always sense that they are written by rather more junior people— I was going to say with rather less care, but care is perhaps the wrong term—as you get that little hint from things. On page 10, the impact assessment states: "““The UK fund regime has been viewed as less favourable by managers and investors for a number of reasons, with the lack of a PCR being one of them””." Perhaps the Minister could enlighten us as to what other reasons exist and what, if anything, he is doing about them.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
733 c237GC 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
EU law Investment Electronic commerce Property transfer Open ended investment companies Shares Taxation
Legislation
Open-ended Investment Companies (Amendment) Regulations 2011
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk