That is what the hon. Gentleman is arguing. However, given that the money that we are talking about has been capped according to the Treasury's judgment of what it believes is available—that means that the overall sum to be offered by way of remedy and redress will be a long way short of what all the other assessments say—I believe that it would useful for the Committee to accept an amendment that would allow us to ensure that the parliamentary ombudsman has some say in overseeing the measures. Under the circumstances, that is fair and reasonable, but if the hon. Gentleman is so content that the scheme as it stands meets everything that the ombudsman has said, he should see such an amendment as adding no particular stress or difficulty for the scheme. Such an amendment would be a way of offering public assurance after all the doubts that have been raised about how Government and Parliament have dealt with the issue.
Equitable Life (Payments) Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Mark Durkan
(Social Democratic & Labour Party)
in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 10 November 2010.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Equitable Life (Payments) Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
518 c310 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 13:19:48 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_679191
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_679191
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_679191