Financial Services Bill Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: HM Treasury

Financial Services Bill

Lord Kerr of Kinlochard Excerpts
Tuesday 6th November 2012

(12 years, 1 month ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Flight Portrait Lord Flight
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, it seems to me that none of these things makes any difference. The real issue is that if a board of directors cannot sack the chief executive if it thinks that he is not doing his job properly, then it is an enfeebled board. That is the fundamental issue. As long as we have the chief executive appointed for a term period and not able to be removed by the board, then there will be an issue about the effectiveness of that board.

Lord Kerr of Kinlochard Portrait Lord Kerr of Kinlochard
- Hansard - -

My Lords, I did not take part in the Second Reading debate. I should have done so. I support what the noble Baroness, Lady Noakes, said, which seemed to me to be absolutely correct. On the point made by the noble Baroness, Lady Wheatcroft, I find Amendment 3B the most bothersome in this group. If the court is merely preparing, not determining, who is determining? There is a danger here of the decision-taking power moving to this oversight committee.

I cannot see that Amendment 3A has any real effect. Clearly, there is an overseeing role if the committee is called “oversight”, but I think that the noble Baroness, Lady Noakes, is quite right about that.

The amendment that seems to be completely correct and would go some way to meet the point being made from the opposition Benches is Amendment 3C, which proposes that the committee should be entitled to a degree of professional support. That seems sensible to me.

--- Later in debate ---
Lord Kerr of Kinlochard Portrait Lord Kerr of Kinlochard
- Hansard - -

I think one has to draw a line between the past and the future. I once again found myself very much in agreement with what the noble Baroness, Lady Noakes, said. If a report was made to the oversight committee and it believed it should be published, and the decision goes to the court, as it should because a subset of the court cannot decide that, it seems to me extraordinarily unlikely—almost unthinkable—that the governor, from a position of one or four against nine, would be able to overturn the view of the oversight committee. The decision must be taken in the court, but it will be a very rare occurrence when a decision as to what is the public interest is taken by the executives overturning the majority view of the oversight committee when the issue comes before the court, so I do not understand the amendment.

Lord Peston Portrait Lord Peston
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, I do not understand the intervention. Why has the governor been given the power if he cannot use it? If you do not want him to use it you do not give it to him.