We should listen to the companies themselves. They state explicitly that they are coming to the UK and expanding their operations here at an alarming rate precisely because of the lack of regulation of our payday industry in comparison with other countries. They are clear that, because we do not have that regulation, we are fertile territory for their practices.
The Treasury Select Committee stated:"““There remains confusion about the role of the FCA in price regulation. We recommend that the Government clarifies””"
the matter. That is crucial. We can make speeches in Parliament saying that we wish this to happen—I welcome the fact that the Minister believes such a power possible—but without explicit legal guidance it is unlikely that the new regulator will be able to take action. That is what the amendment is about.
The second question is about whether other powers will be available to affect the kinds of behaviour we all want stopped. In an industry where one firm posted a pre-tax profit this year of £162 million, a fine for consumer detriment would simply be an occupational hazard, not a deterrent. Given that the chief executive of another firm earned £1.6 million in a single year and that the maximum fine the OFT can levy is £50,000, it would simply be annoying, not a wake-up call.
Taking away these firms' consumer credit licences, which, as I said, has happened only once in the past eight years, is only one possible solution, and the regulators would rightly wish to hold such a nuclear response in reserve. On the other hand, regulating what companies can charge and the product through regulating their cost and duration could benefit consumer credit markets and the companies themselves by setting clear guidelines about what is acceptable in the UK. We would all agree, I am sure, that such a power would need to be used only once for the industry to get the message that this county no longer tolerated legal loan sharking.
This is the third time we have had this debate. I know the Minister understands the problems and that he shares my concerns about this industry and its impact on families across the country, but I question whether he is really committed to understanding the possible solutions at our disposal and the opportunity presented by the legislation to make progress and to send a clear message about the need to reform this market. He will win not only my gratitude and that of other Opposition Members dealing with these problems but the gratitude of ““EastEnders”” fans watching such problems unfolding on their screens and of the thousands of us living with high streets pockmarked with these companies. He will also win the support of the fans of the Cobblers, Tangerines and Jambos who are horrified to see companies targeting them through their football clubs. Let us do this now. Let us protect British consumers in the way they deserve. I ask the Minister please to support the amendment and to listen to Government Members who also wish to see progress. Let us have no more delay. The people whom we all represent who are struggling with these companies need and deserve better.
Financial Services Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Stella Creasy
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Monday, 23 April 2012.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Financial Services Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
543 c716-7 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 16:51:47 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_824634
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_824634
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_824634