My Lords, I did not take part in the Second Reading debate, although I have put in a lot of work reading the Bill. I did not take part precisely for the reason put to your Lordships by my noble friend Lord Barnett—namely, that it did not remotely seem to me that the Bill could go anywhere, and that therefore I should wait until we had won the election and could then reintroduce it. I am still very puzzled as to why we are putting in all this effort at this time—especially as my reading of the Bill is that it is an integrated whole. Rightly or wrongly, it is a Bill which fits together and therefore I am alarmed at the idea that any bit of it might be dealt with in the wash-up. It is the last thing that is needed.
Having said all that, rather acerbically, I learnt something from the noble Baroness, Lady Noakes. I think that she referred to the Bank of England as a quango. She is entirely right, but it had never occurred to me that the Bank of England should be spoken of in that way—indeed, I regard that as extraordinarily disrespectful. I am also worried because, given the Opposition’s commitment to abolishing quangos, if by some mischance they got elected, the Bank of England might be top of their list. It would certainly save a great deal of money.
Financial Services Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Peston
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 10 March 2010.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Financial Services Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
718 c251 
Session
2009-10
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 20:30:11 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_629535
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_629535
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_629535