1-20 of 123 results for subject:Protection
Librarians' tools
- Search time
- 0.383 seconds
- Solr query time
- 0.008 seconds
- Search query
- subject:Protection
- We searched for
- subject_t:Protection OR subject_ses:92640
Session
X
1996-97
Type
+
Legislation (15)
+
Bills (3)
+
Public bills (3)
-
Government bills (1)
+
Private members' bills (2)
-
Ballot bills (1)
-
Presentation bills (1)
+
Delegated legislation (12)
-
Statutory instruments (12)
+
Members' contributions (26)
-
Oral answers to questions (13)
-
Oral questions (13)
+
Parliamentary committees (13)
+
Committee proceedings (7)
-
Committee of the Whole House (HC) (2)
-
Delegated Legislation Committee proceedings (3)
-
European Committee proceedings (1)
-
Select Committee reports (6)
+
Parliamentary papers (18)
-
Command papers (10)
-
House of Commons papers (5)
-
House of Lords papers (2)
-
Treaties (10)
-
Unprinted papers (1)
+
Parliamentary proceedings (16)
+
Debates (13)
-
Adjournment debates (1)
+
Committee proceedings (7)
-
Committee of the Whole House (HC) (2)
-
Delegated Legislation Committee proceedings (3)
-
European Committee proceedings (1)
+
Legislative debates (10)
-
Debates on bills (6)
-
Debates on delegated legislation (4)
+
Formal proceedings (1)
-
Legislative formal proceedings (1)
+
Parliamentary questions (61)
-
Oral questions (13)
-
Written questions (48)
House
Session
More
1996-97 (123)
Year
Department
More
Member
More
Primary member
More
Answering member
More
Legislative stage
Legislation
More
Subject
More
Publisher
What steps he plans to take to ensure that prudent investment principles are adopted by scheme managers under Basic Pension Plus.
What steps he plans to take to ensure that prudent investment principles are adopted by scheme managers under Basic Pension Plus.
Asked by
Lord Garnier
(Conservative)
Answered by
Oliver Heald
(Conservative)
Answering body
Department of Social Security
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
For answer on
20 March 1997
Answered on
20 March 1997
Mr. Garnier: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what steps he plans to take to ensure that prudent investment
principles are adopted by scheme managers under basic pension plus. [21397]
Mr. Heald: We would discuss with the pensions industry regulators and others any appropriate restrictions to guard against
exploitation of the Government guarantee on the basic pension. We may introduce legislation to require scheme managers to publish,
and be liable for adhering to, a statement of investment principles based on the "prudent person" principle; to prescribe rules on
the amounts of funds to be allocated to different types of asset, and to require pension providers to disregard the existence of the
Government guarantee in investment decisions.
Subjects
Consumers; Investment; Financial services; Protection; Pensions; Personal pensions; Pension funds; State retirement pensions
Date
20 March 1997
Reference
21397; 292 c906W
House
House of Commons
Building Societies Bill. Lords second reading debate. Motion that Bill be committed to Committee of the Whole House. Agreed to on question. Committee stage. Clauses 1 to 47 and Schedules 1 to 9 agreed to. Bill reported without amendment. Report stage and third reading (formal). Debate on motion that Bill do now pass. Agreed to on question. Passed.
Building Societies Bill. Lords second reading debate. Motion that Bill be committed to Committee of the Whole House. Agreed to on question. Committee stage. Clauses 1 to 47 and Schedules 1 to 9 agreed to. Bill reported without amendment. Report stage and third reading (formal). Debate on motion that Bill...
Lead member
Lord Mackay of Ardbrecknish
Answering member
Lord Eatwell
Department
Treasury; Committee of the Whole House (HL)
Type
Debates on bills
Legislative stage
Committee stage; Third reading; Report stage; Second reading
Legislation
Building Societies Bill 1996/97
Subjects
Consumers; Building societies; Investment; Financial services; Protection; Takeovers; Building Societies Commission
Date
19 March 1997
Reference
579 c967-86
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
What plans he has to modify the powers of the regulators of the privatised utilities.
What plans he has to modify the powers of the regulators of the privatised utilities.
Asked by
Alan W Williams
(Labour)
Answered by
John M Taylor
(Conservative)
Answering body
Department of Trade and Industry
Oral questions - Lead
Status
Answered
For answer on
19 March 1997
Answered on
19 March 1997
Subjects
Consumers; Privatisation; Protection; Price caps; Regulation; Utilities
Date
19 March 1997
Reference
19426; 292 c863
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
What recent representations he has received regarding reform of the regulatory system for the privatised utilities.
What recent representations he has received regarding reform of the regulatory system for the privatised utilities.
Asked by
Bill Michie
(Labour)
Answered by
John M Taylor
(Conservative)
Answering body
Department of Trade and Industry
Oral questions - Lead
Status
Answered
For answer on
19 March 1997
Answered on
19 March 1997
Subjects
Consumers; Privatisation; Protection; Regulation; Utilities
Date
19 March 1997
Reference
19444; 292 c863
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
1st supplementary on same.
1st supplementary on same.
Asked by
Bill Michie
(Labour)
Answering body
Department of Trade and Industry
Oral questions - 1st Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
19 March 1997
Subjects
Consumers; Privatisation; Protection; Regulation; Utilities
Date
19 March 1997
Reference
292 c863
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
1st supplementary on price controls for public utilities.
1st supplementary on price controls for public utilities.
Asked by
Alan W Williams
(Labour)
Answering body
Department of Trade and Industry
Oral questions - 1st Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
19 March 1997
Subjects
Consumers; Privatisation; Protection; Price caps; Regulation; Utilities
Date
19 March 1997
Reference
292 c863
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
Supplementary on prices charged by privatised utilities.
Supplementary on prices charged by privatised utilities.
Asked by
John Battle
(Labour)
Answering body
Department of Trade and Industry
Oral questions - 1st Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
19 March 1997
Subjects
Consumers; Protection; Utilities; Service charges
Date
19 March 1997
Reference
292 c865
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
Answered by
John M Taylor
(Conservative)
Asked by
Alan W Williams
(Labour)
Answering body
Department of Trade and Industry
Type
Oral answers to questions
What plans he has to modify the powers of the regulators of the privatised utilities.
Subjects
Consumers; Privatisation; Protection; Price caps; Regulation; Utilities
Date
19 March 1997
Reference
292 c863
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
Answered by
John M Taylor
(Conservative)
Asked by
Bill Michie
(Labour)
Answering body
Department of Trade and Industry
Type
Oral answers to questions
What recent representations he has received regarding reform of the regulatory system for the privatised utilities.
Subjects
Consumers; Privatisation; Protection; Regulation; Utilities
Date
19 March 1997
Reference
292 c863
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
Answered by
John M Taylor
(Conservative)
Answering body
Department of Trade and Industry
Type
Oral answers to questions
Subjects
Consumers; Protection; Utilities; Service charges
Date
19 March 1997
Reference
292 c865
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
Answered by
John M Taylor
(Conservative)
Answering body
Department of Trade and Industry
Type
Oral answers to questions
Subjects
Consumers; Privatisation; Protection; Regulation; Utilities
Date
19 March 1997
Reference
292 c863
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
Answered by
John M Taylor
(Conservative)
Answering body
Department of Trade and Industry
Type
Oral answers to questions
Subjects
Consumers; Privatisation; Protection; Price caps; Regulation; Utilities
Date
19 March 1997
Reference
292 c863
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
Type
House of Commons papers
Author
Office of Telecommunications
Laid on
19 March 1997
Subjects
Consumers; Competition; Licensing; Protection; Office of Telecommunications; Telecommunications; Utilities
Commons Library location
CS 130
Date
19 March 1997
Reference
HC 379 1996/97
House
House of Commons
If he will assess the advantages of extending the provisions of Part V of the Crime and Punishment Bill (Scotland) to members of the Faculty of Advocates to enhance consumer protection. - (Holding answer 18 March 1997).
If he will assess the advantages of extending the provisions of Part V of the Crime and Punishment Bill (Scotland) to members of the Faculty of Advocates to enhance consumer protection. - (Holding answer 18 March 1997).
Asked by
Lord McFall of Alcluith
(Labour)
Answered by
Lord Selkirk of Douglas
(Conservative)
Answering body
Scottish Office
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
For answer on
18 March 1997
Answered on
18 March 1997
Mr. McFall: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will assess the advantages of extending the provisions of part V of the
Crime and Punishment Bill (Scotland) to members of the Faculty of Advocates to enhance consumer protection. [19073]
Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: [holding answer 18 March 1997]: My right hon. Friend has no immediate plans to extend the provisions of
part V to members of the Faculty of Advocates. Such a proposal would require consultation with those affected and further detailed
consideration in the light of experience of the implementation of these provisions in relation to solicitors.
Legislation
Crime and Punishment (Scotland) Bill 1996/97
Subjects
Consumers; Protection; Scotland; Faculty of Advocates
Date
18 March 1997
Reference
19073; 292 c555W
House
House of Commons
SI 1997/931 (Negative instrument). Coming into force 9 April 1997.
SI 1997/931 (Negative instrument). Coming into force 9 April 1997.
Department
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food
Type
Statutory instruments
Procedure
Negative
Laid on
18 March 1997
Made on
17 March 1997
Coming into force
9 April 1997
Legislation
Fisheries Act 1981; Third Country Fishing (Enforcement) Order 1997
Subjects
Fisheries; Fixed penalties; EU law; Fishing limits; Fines; Fish; Protection; Quotas; Norway; Faroe Islands
Commons Library location
UP 1064 1996/97
Date
18 March 1997
Reference
SI 1997/931
House
House of Commons; House of Lords
What assessment he has made of the implications of the recent outbreak of Newcastle's disease for (a) public health and (b) consumer protection.
What assessment he has made of the implications of the recent outbreak of Newcastle's disease for (a) public health and (b) consumer protection.
Asked by
Gavin Strang
(Labour)
Answered by
Viscount Hailsham
(Conservative)
Answering body
Ministry of Agriculture Fisheries and Food
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
For answer on
17 March 1997
Answered on
17 March 1997
Dr. Strang: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what assessment he has made of the implications of the recent
outbreak of Newcastle disease for (a) public health and (b) consumer protection. [20055]
Mr. Hogg: There is no risk to public health from poultry meat which may contain the Newcastle disease virus and, therefore, no
consequences for consumer protection.
Newcastle disease virus can be spread through the air from infected birds and contact with such birds can occasionally cause
conjunctivitis, fever and flu like symptoms in humans. The risk of human infection is low, even when handling birds known to be
infected.
The Department of Health have been kept fully informed of developments.
Subjects
Consumers; Diseases; Food; Poultry; Protection; Standards; Newcastle disease
Date
17 March 1997
Reference
20055; 292 c370W
House
House of Commons
Type
Select Committee reports; House of Commons papers;
Parliamentary committees
Committee
Trade and Industry Committee
Notes
Received 20.03.97
Subjects
Consumers; Competition; British Telecom; Licensing; Protection; Mergers; Prices; Telecommunications; Regulation; Utilities; Telephones; Rural Development Commission; Communication Workers Union; Consumers Association; Cable Communications Association; MCI Telecommunications; Society of Telecom Executives
Commons Library location
CS 340;Research Sc 384,P
Date
17 March 1997
Reference
HC 254 1996/97
House
House of Commons
Building Societies Bill. Committee stage. Clauses 1 to 47 agreed to, clause 10 as amended. New clauses considered. Schedules 1 to 9 agreed to. Bill reported with amendments. Report stage third reading (formal).
Building Societies Bill. Committee stage. Clauses 1 to 47 agreed to, clause 10 as amended. New clauses considered. Schedules 1 to 9 agreed to. Bill reported with amendments. Report stage third reading (formal).
Lead member
Angela Knight
Department
Treasury
Type
Debates on bills; Committee of the Whole House (HC)
Legislative stage
Committee stage; Third reading; Report stage
Procedure
New clauses
Legislation
Building Societies Bill 1996/97
Subjects
Consumers; Directors; Building societies; Investment; Financial services; Protection; Mergers; Shares; Takeovers
Date
17 March 1997
Reference
292 c627-66
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
Statement on what measures he intends to implement to improve the supervision of the solvency of Lloyd's of London. - Includes figures and fact that have today laid regulations before the House.
Statement on what measures he intends to implement to improve the supervision of the solvency of Lloyd's of London. - Includes figures and fact that have today laid regulations before the House.
Asked by
Lord Garnier
(Conservative)
Answered by
Anthony Nelson
(Conservative)
Answering body
Department of Trade and Industry
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
For answer on
11 March 1997
Answered on
11 March 1997
Mr. Garnier: To ask the President of the Board of Trade what measures he intends to implement to improve the supervision of the
solvency of Lloyd's of London. [20065]
Mr. Nelson: Following the successful completion of Lloyd's reconstruction and renewal plan last year, I have been considering
whether any steps need to be taken to strengthen further the protection to policyholders provided by the solvency margin regime in
the Insurance Companies Act 1982, as adapted for Lloyd's.
I have concluded that it would be appropriate to introduce an additional solvency test for Lloyd's supplementing those already
specified in the legislation. I have today laid regulations before the House that will achieve this with effect from the end of this
year.
Under the arrangements provided for by the Insurance Companies Act 1982, Lloyd's is currently subject to two separate solvency
tests. The first requires an auditor to certify that there are assets, including centrally held assets, of sufficient value to meet
the liabilities of each member of Lloyd's. The second test treats Lloyd's as a whole as if it were a single insurance company and
requires Lloyd's to maintain sufficient assets to cover its total liabilities plus a minimum margin of solvency. That global
required solvency margin equates broadly to the greater of 16 per cent. of the total net premiums in the previous year or 23 per
cent of the average total claims incurred over a three-year period. Failure to meet either of these test would trigger the
intervention powers of the Secretary of State.
The third test which I have now introduced requires Lloyd's to demonstrate that it can cover an additional "combined" minimum margin
of solvency. This combined margin is calculated on the basis of a prescribed level of net assets for each member, in addition to
that required to cover their liabilities. If any members are unable to demonstrate such net assets, Lloyd's will be required to show
that sufficient centrally held assets--principally the central fund--are available to cover the aggregate of the individual
shortfalls. The assets of other members which exceed their prescribed level of net assets may not be taken into account for these
purposes. Failure to meet this additional test would also trigger the Secretary of State's intervention powers.
This additional test reflects better the fact that members of Lloyd's are not responsible for each other's losses, while recognising
that Lloyd's does have centrally held assets that can be used to cover any shortfalls. It will provide policyholders with an
additional degree of protection against adverse developments, and will also encourage a prompt response should financial
difficulties ever begin to develop at Lloyd's in the future. Lloyd's is reviewing its own financial requirements, placed on its
members and other aspects of the Lloyd's chain of security, in ways which should complement the changes I am announcing today and
which should enhance further the security of policyholders.
Legislation
Insurance (Lloyds) Regulations 1997
Subjects
Consumers; Investment; Protection; Lloyds of London
Date
11 March 1997
Reference
20065; 292 c133-4W
House
House of Commons
Type
Select Committee reports; House of Commons papers;
Parliamentary committees
Committee
Trade and Industry Committee
Notes
Received 18.03.97
Subjects
Consumers; Accountability; Conservation; Competition; Environment protection; Energy; Electricity; Industry; Protection; Natural gas; Policy; Prices; Powergen; National Power; National Consumer Council; Standards; Regulation; Utilities; Trades Union Congress; Northern Electric; Office of the Rail Regulator; Royal Society for the Protection of Birds; Scottish Hydro Electric; RJB Mining; Yorkshire Electricity; North Western Electricity Board; South Wales Electricity; Seeboard; Royal Academy of Engineering; South Western Electricity; WWF-UK; Centre for the Study of Regulated Industries; National Federation of Consumer Groups; National Right to Fuel Campaign; Society of British Gas Industries; Strategy and Implementation Consultancy; Helm, Dieter; Cooper, Tony; Graham, Cosmo
Commons Library location
CS 340;Research Sc 333.79,P
Date
11 March 1997
Reference
HC 50 1996/97
House
House of Commons