All 2 Debates between Lord Harlech and Lord Forsyth of Drumlean

Ukraine: Depleted Uranium

Debate between Lord Harlech and Lord Forsyth of Drumlean
Thursday 30th March 2023

(1 year, 8 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Lord Forsyth of Drumlean Portrait Lord Forsyth of Drumlean (Con)
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, is it not important that we keep a sense of proportion here? People in Ukraine are being blown to smithereens by Putin’s missiles. There may be arguments about the health effects of these weapons but those are as nothing compared to what is happening to the Ukrainians. That is why it is so important that we continue to support them in every way we can to defeat this tyrant and his dreadful behaviour.

Lord Harlech Portrait Lord Harlech (Con)
- View Speech - Hansard - -

I thank my noble friend for that support. He is entirely right that the major threat to life and the environment, and to the way of life of the people of Ukraine, is coming from the shelling and merciless bombardment from Russia’s forces. That must end immediately.

Financial Services and Markets Bill

Debate between Lord Harlech and Lord Forsyth of Drumlean
Lord Harlech Portrait Lord Harlech (Con)
- Hansard - -

My Lords, the Government agree that the regular review of rules after implementation is essential to ensure that they remain appropriate and continue to have the desired effect.

The Bill makes a number of substantial changes to the regulators’ framework to ensure that such reviews will be an integral part of the regulators’ functions going forward. In particular, Clause 27 inserts a new provision into FSMA that will require the FCA and the PRA to keep their rules under review. To supplement this duty and ensure that there is a mechanism to require the regulators to conduct reviews of their existing rules where needed, Clause 27 also inserts a new power into FSMA for the Treasury to direct the regulators to review their rules where the Treasury considers it is in the public interest. Clause 46 inserts similar provisions into FSMA for the Bank of England in relation to its regulation of CCPs and CSDs.

I will speak first to Amendments 78 and 145 in the name of the noble Baroness, Lady Bowles. I assure her that the powers inserted into FSMA by Clauses 27 and 46 of this Bill already allow the Treasury to require these regulators to review a range of rules, entire regimes and interrelated rules, as appropriate, where that is in the public interest.

I turn next to Amendments 79 and 146, also in the name of the noble Baroness, Lady Bowles. In order for the Treasury to direct the regulators to review their rules, certain criteria must be met. One of the key criteria is that the Treasury considers the review of the rule or rules in question to be in the public interest. It will be important for the Treasury to work with parliamentary committees to understand the evidence base for whether it is in the public interest to exercise the power.

Lord Forsyth of Drumlean Portrait Lord Forsyth of Drumlean (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I am most grateful to my noble friend; I apologise for not having been able to attend all the Committee’s meetings. Can my noble friend help me by defining “public interest”—that is, how it will be defined?

Lord Harlech Portrait Lord Harlech (Con)
- Hansard - -

I understand what my noble friend is getting at and think that, when each issue is put to the Treasury, it will consider whether or not it is in the public interest.

--- Later in debate ---
Lord Forsyth of Drumlean Portrait Lord Forsyth of Drumlean (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I am most grateful to my noble friend and do not want to detain the Committee, but the whole point of the noble Baroness’s amendment is to avoid exactly this kind of debate. To my mind, what is in the public interest suggests a very substantial test, leaving the regulators to mark their own homework.

Lord Harlech Portrait Lord Harlech (Con)
- Hansard - -

Like I said, I will speak to the department and write with a definition of what constitutes “in the public interest”.

Parliamentary committees can already conduct their own inquiries and hearings, call for papers, and call for individuals and organisations to give evidence. The power in Clause 27 seeks to complement, rather than substitute or detract from, the important role played by parliamentary committees. It will be important for the Treasury to work with parliamentary committees to understand the evidence base for whether it is in the public interest to exercise the power.

On Amendment 79A, from my noble friend Lady Noakes, as with parliamentary representations, it will be important for the Treasury to consider the views of the regulators’ statutory panels and representatives of those affected by the rules. However, it would be inappropriate for the Treasury to provide a running commentary on the individual representations made. In addition, the FCA and the PRA have committed to ensuring that there are clear and appropriate channels for industry and other stakeholders to raise concerns about specific rules. These channels will be set out in the regulators’ policy statements on rule review, required by Clause 27, in due course.