UK Parliament / Open data

Financial Services Bill

Proceeding contribution from Guy Opperman (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Monday, 23 April 2012. It occurred during Debate on bills on Financial Services Bill.
It is a pleasure to speak in this debate, albeit briefly. Like Mark Antony in ““Julius Caesar””, I come to praise the Bill, not to criticise it. I accept that the Government are all honourable men and women, but so, it might be reasoned, are the members of the Treasury Committee, who are also honourable men and women, advancing a slightly contrary view. I support the fundamental ethos of clause 1 and welcome the review of the performance of the Bank of England. I certainly do not support Opposition amendment 28, which would remove clause 5; that would be entirely wrong in the present circumstances. I speak as a critical friend of the present system and as the secretary of the all-party group on the Arch Cru Investment Scheme, which is seeking to recover compensation for the thousands of men and women in this country who have lost their lifetime savings. What happened to them is manifestly wrong, and anything that this House can do to strengthen the regulatory system to prevent such disasters, I welcome wholeheartedly. I speak also as an MP who, almost every week, has a constituent come to me saying that they are unable to obtain bank lending and finance. That is because of the lack of competition in the present banking structure—an issue that is raised regularly. I urge the House to embrace greater competition and to open up the market to competitors to the existing large banks, which will be in a position to provide the bank finance sought by businesses up and down the country. The other end of the telescope must also be addressed. At present, we have the large banks, but there are no small banks. Germany and America have local banking structures that work tremendously positively: individuals can set up local banks, which provide for a community purpose above all else, which is manifestly a good thing. That is why I support wholeheartedly the competition objectives set out in new section 1E of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000, inserted by clause 5, which states that there should be an emphasis on"““the ease with which new entrants can enter the market, and…how far competition is encouraging innovation.””" I have met the chairman of Metro bank, which is that remarkable thing: a bank set up to exist at the weekend. It opens on weekends and at 8 o'clock in the morning. Imagine what could be done if we had that at the local level. I am grateful for what Hector Sants, the present chief executive of the FSA, told me in a letter dated 12 March:"““We are conscious of the balance to be struck between ensuring high standards at the gateway, and the importance of allowing innovation and appropriate levels of access for new firms.””" The letter continues:"““there has been public debate about the potential advantages of new entrants in the area of small, regional banks focused on servicing the SME sector. In such cases we will be proportionate in our approach and would invite all firms with a viable business model and appropriate levels of resources to a pre-application meeting to help guide them through the application process””." The Bill will, I suggest and sincerely hope, make it easer to establish local banks, which can only be a good thing.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
543 c761-2 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Back to top