1-5 of 5 results for askedby:"Lord Joffe"
Librarians' tools
- Search time
- 0.236 seconds
- Solr query time
- 0.001 seconds
- Search query
- askedby:"Lord Joffe"
- We searched for
- tablingMember_ses:301479 OR askingMember_ses:301479
Type
House
Session
Year
Department
Member
Primary member
Answering member
Legislative stage
Legislation
Subject
Publisher
My Lords, bearing in mind that pension funds and institutional funds are influential owners of most of the companies soon to be subject to Defra emissions guidelines, does the Minister agree that those guidelines should be extended to their investment portfolios, which has been done very successfully by a major pension company in Australia?
My Lords, bearing in mind that pension funds and institutional funds are influential owners of most of the companies soon to be subject to Defra emissions guidelines, does the Minister agree that those guidelines should be extended to their investment portfolios, which has been done very successfully by a major pension company in Australia?
Asked by
Lord Joffe
(Labour)
Oral questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
9 July 2009
My Lords, the noble Lord is right: the Defra emissions reporting guidelines are out for public consultation. They are expected to be published by October. These guidelines explain how an organisation should measure its corporate footprint as a first step in helping it to improve its emissions management. Those are very important data that one would expect would influence shareholders, be they trustees or others, in their engagement with companies. The purpose of the consultation is to seek views on the guidance. As with all consultations, the views of those who respond will be given full and careful consideration by the Government before any final decisions are made. Therefore, it would not be appropriate for the Government to pre-empt where that consultation may lead.
Subjects
Disclosure of information; Investment; Ethics; Pension funds
Date
9 July 2009
Reference
712 c758-9
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, I thank the Minister for his reply, but the problem rests with the Financial Services Authority rules. My noble friend may not be aware that in the current negotiations relating to the reattribution of the inherited estate of the Norwich Union, amounting to £3.2 billion, both the policyholders’ advocate and Which? have expressed concern about whether policyholders will get a fair deal under the FSA rules. Although the FSA—
My Lords, are not the Government concerned that the effect of these rules will be that much of the 90 per cent of the inherited estate due to policyholders, as set out in the Government’s published policy on inherited estates, will go to shareholders rather than policyholders? Will they put pressure on the FSA to ensure that the government policy of 90 per cent of the inherited estate to policyholders and 10 per cent to shareholders will be followed in reattributions?
My Lords, I thank the Minister for his reply, but the problem rests with the Financial Services Authority rules. My noble friend may not be aware that in the current negotiations relating to the reattribution of the inherited estate of the Norwich Union, amounting to £3.2 billion, both the policyholders’ advocate and Which? have expressed concern about whether policyholders will get a fair deal under the FSA rules. Although the FSA—
My Lords, are not the Government concerned that the effect of these rules will be that much of the 90 per cent of the inherited estate due to policyholders, as set out in the Government’s published policy on inherited estates, will go to shareholders rather than policyholders? Will they put pressure on the FSA to ensure that the government policy of 90 per cent of the inherited estate to policyholders and 10 per cent to shareholders will be followed in reattributions?
Asked by
Lord Joffe
(Labour)
Oral questions - 1st Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
22 April 2008
My Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend for his question. There is a distinction between the distribution of surplus funds, which has followed and does follow the broad principle of 90 per cent to policyholders and 10 per cent to shareholders, and the issue of reattribution which arises in the Norwich Union case. This is because reattribution involves the buyout of policyholders and raises the issue of the company’s necessary assets for the future as well as accumulated assets in the past; it raises different issues. That is why the FSA scrutinises these arrangements with great care, as I indicated in my Answer. Negotiations are still going on between Norwich Union and the policyholder advocate. We await the outcome of those negotiations.
Subjects
Consumers; Finance; Insurance companies; Insurance; Protection; Shareholders; Norwich Union
Date
22 April 2008
Reference
700 c1382
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
What steps they are taking to ensure a fair result for policyholders in the current negotiations over the reattribution of the inherited estates of with-profits funds.
What steps they are taking to ensure a fair result for policyholders in the current negotiations over the reattribution of the inherited estates of with-profits funds.
Asked by
Lord Joffe
(Labour)
Answered by
Lord Davies of Oldham
(Labour)
Oral questions - Lead
Status
Answered
For answer on
22 April 2008
Answered on
22 April 2008
My Lords, this is a matter for the independent regulator—the Financial Services Authority—and the courts. The Financial Services Authority sets the rules covering the management of with-profits funds. It requires firms pursuing reattributions to appoint an independent policyholder advocate to represent policyholders in negotiations with the firm. On completion of the negotiations, the FSA will assess the fairness of the deal and make public its conclusion on what fair treatment would require for consumers. Policyholders have a right to vote on the proposal.
Subjects
Consumers; Finance; Insurance companies; Insurance; Protection
Date
22 April 2008
Reference
700 c1382
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
asked Her Majesty's Government:What steps they have taken to ensure that loans to agencies of the Government of Zimbabwe and the purchase of Zimbabwean treasury bills and government bonds by British banks do not breach the European Union common position prohibition on making funds and economic resources available to individuals...
asked Her Majesty's Government:What steps they have taken to ensure that loans to agencies of the Government of Zimbabwe and the purchase of Zimbabwean treasury bills and government bonds by British banks do not breach the European Union common position prohibition on making funds and economic resources available to individuals...
Asked by
Lord Joffe
(Labour)
Answered by
Lord Malloch-Brown
(Labour)
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Answered on
1 October 2007
The EU targeted measures on Zimbabwe impose, inter alia, an assets freeze on individual members of the Government of Zimbabwe, including President Mugabe, which includes a prohibition on making funds or economic resources available, directly or indirectly, to them. The Bank of England, acting as an agent for HM Treasury, is responsible for making banks in the UK fully aware of this.
Where there is information to suggest that a breach of the EU targeted measures has occurred or of a connection between a designated person and a company operating in the UK, HM Treasury, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and the Bank of England work closely together to investigate the matter.
Notes
Answer received between Monday 10 September and Friday 14 September 2007.
Subjects
Banks; Finance; EU action; Overseas investment; Sanctions; Zimbabwe
Date
1 October 2007
Reference
5096; 694 c237WA
House
House of Lords
Supplementary on international development funding to middle income countries and the key criteria applied by the DFID in reallocating funds to Iraq.
Supplementary on international development funding to middle income countries and the key criteria applied by the DFID in reallocating funds to Iraq.
Asked by
Lord Joffe
(Crossbench)
Oral questions - 1st Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
10 November 2003
Date
10 November 2003
Reference
654 c1090-1
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords