Obviously we are waiting to hear what the Government will say about their amendment, but the other amendments—including the new clause proposed by the hon. Member for Harrow East (Bob Blackman)—are in essence an attempt to ensure that there is a sense of competent independence in how the scheme is administered and payments made. In terms of making appeals available and ensuring that the design and administration of the scheme are independent of Government, the new clause offers a reasonable construct of what a clearly independent scheme would be.
In the debate on the previous group of amendments, there were many references to pledges that many of us signed and how far the Government's measures will mean that we have discharged those pledges, but I do not think that any of us signed pledges that said we would do the whole thing just according to Treasury lights and nothing else. The amendments are an attempt to ensure that it will not only be Treasury lights that will govern the terms of the scheme and its performance.
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 c328-9 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 13:22:55 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_679239
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_679239
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_679239