My Lords, I had not intended to intervene on this amendment, and before I speak, perhaps I had better remind the Committee of my interests as set out in the register. I think that everything has been said about the natural justice and injustice of the reverse burden of proof, particularly on this side by the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Southwark. I do not want to take that line because the argument is clear; rather, I want to add two practical thoughts. The first is that if there has been wrongdoing in a financial institution, I do not think that anyone in this House would support the guilty parties getting away with it, however senior they are in the organisation. The question is not whether they should get away with it but whether the powers exist to enable the regulators, and then the proper prosecuting authorities, to take appropriate action. I remind the Committee that the PRA has very extensive powers. If the authority considers that there has been malfeasance in a financial institution, it is able to go in and trawl through the records of that institution in great detail, to the extent of looking at email trails.
Bank of England and Financial Services Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Carrington of Fulham
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 11 November 2015.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Bank of England and Financial Services Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
765 c2029 
Session
2015-16
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2015-11-17 11:13:59 +0000
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2015-11-11/15111147000221
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2015-11-11/15111147000221
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2015-11-11/15111147000221