Financial Services Bill

I thank my noble friend Lord Hamilton for his support this evening and am sorry if I disappointed him by being too timid with my amendment. I will try harder later on. The Minister has not adequately explained why the Bill says there must be some form of consultation—we say there should be more—but that that consultation is not to be revealed to the public. It seems that most of this Bill is just window-dressing. Things are put in to make it look as if there is some transparency and a council with processes that the public are supposed to admire. There is no substance whatever behind these clauses. It is just puff. The Minister has shown that in his response, putting in subsection (8) that there must be some consultation and then saying that the three authorities will work out their relationships themselves. If they just need to work out their relationships themselves, what on earth is the point of subsection (8)? I shall not press this case now. If we ever take this Bill on to later stages I shall certainly return to it. For now I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment 9 withdrawn. Amendment 10 not moved. House resumed. Committee to begin again not before 8.35 pm. Debate on whether Clause 1 should stand part of the Bill.