Skip to main content

1-20 of 39 results for subject:Finance

Legislation X
Dormant Bank and Building Society Accounts Bill (HL) 2007-08
Member X
Ian Pearson

Type

House

Session

Year

Department

Member

Primary member

Answering member

Legislative stage

Legislation

Subject

Publisher


Show detailed: On Off
Results: 10 20 50 100
Sort by: Newest first Oldest first

I very much appreciate the probing nature of the amendments tabled by the hon. Members for North Southwark and Bermondsey (Simon Hughes) and for Fareham (Mr. Hoban). The legislation defines the basic architecture for the operation of the reclaim scheme, how it will transfer funds to the Big Lottery Fund...

Member
Ian Pearson (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 November 2008
Reference
482 c77-8
House
House of Commons

It is one matter to decide how much money goes from banks and building societies into the reclaim fund and over what period—I have tried to give some indication as to how it would be likely to operate—and there is another set of decisions in terms of the transfer of...

Member
Ian Pearson (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 November 2008
Reference
482 c78
House
House of Commons

If I may, I shall say more about that when I turn to the next amendment, because it is probably more convenient to do so then. However, I should point out that there are certain issues in respect of the Financial Services Authority and regulatory approval of the reclaim fund,...

Member
Ian Pearson (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 November 2008
Reference
482 c81-2
House
House of Commons

The Government's clear policy intention has always been that youth spending in England should be the priority, but there are other considerations, particularly with regard to the build up of the fund, as I mentioned earlier. If the Government were minded to support and take forward the social investment wholesaler,...

Member
Ian Pearson (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 November 2008
Reference
482 c80-1
House
House of Commons

I agree strongly with the latter point. On the former, obviously the BLF has to operate within the legislative framework in the Bill and in accordance with the Government's directions. I shall talk in a minute about the strategic plan, which I hope will provide even more clarification. Amendment No....

Member
Ian Pearson (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 November 2008
Reference
482 c80
House
House of Commons

I beg to move, That the Bill be now read the Third time. We have had an interesting debate on Report. I am grateful to all hon. Members who took part and to those who served on the Public Bill Committee. I am grateful for the good spirit and the...

Member
Ian Pearson (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 November 2008
Reference
482 c84-5
House
House of Commons

What I would wish to happen is that during the course of the financial year 2009-2010 we have not only a reclaim fund up and running, but banks and building societies transferring money into it. I would also like to think that the reclaim fund will be making decisions during...

Member
Ian Pearson (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 November 2008
Reference
482 c84
House
House of Commons

New clause 1 proposes giving the Government a power to establish a central register and to put in place specific arrangements regarding charitable legacies. The Government share several of the concerns expressed by the hon. Member for Fareham (Mr. Hoban). I was disappointed that he did not want to accept...

Member
Ian Pearson (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 November 2008
Reference
482 c48-9
House
House of Commons

I heard the hon. Gentleman make that suggestion in his contribution, and if he feels that strongly about it, I am surprised that he has not tabled an appropriate amendment for discussion today. Naturally, we welcome all constructive suggestions about how relationships can be improved, and my understanding of the...

Member
Ian Pearson (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 November 2008
Reference
482 c49-50
House
House of Commons

Clause 5(4) contains a direction-making power as an ultimate safeguard allowing the Treasury to take action to ensure that a reclaim fund complies with its company objects and articles of association. We discussed the clause in Committee, and I am grateful for the contributions that were made then. I emphasise...

Member
Ian Pearson (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 November 2008
Reference
482 c61-2
House
House of Commons

It is my understanding that the normal parliamentary use of the word ““sanction”” is such that it can include a range of measures; there might be penalties and fines, but others might also apply. Perhaps I am using the word loosely in this circumstance, but the direction in question is...

Member
Ian Pearson (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 November 2008
Reference
482 c63-4
House
House of Commons

That will essentially be a matter for the company, because it is a private company. I imagine that discussions will be held between members of the Treasury and members of the reclaim fund, and that they will also include the Financial Services Authority, which has some overall responsibilities with regard...

Member
Ian Pearson (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 November 2008
Reference
482 c62
House
House of Commons

Yes, I do want to get on with things as quickly as possible, and I share the hon. Gentleman's enthusiasm, and that of all hon. Members, for a scheme to be up and running as soon as possible. I assure him that the Act will be brought into force as...

Member
Ian Pearson (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 November 2008
Reference
482 c83
House
House of Commons

We would always seek to act in as good time as we could in such matters. Amendment No. 5 seeks to clarify that English expenditure on youth can be revenue or capital. I understand its probing nature and would simply argue that it is unnecessary because clause 17 is wide...

Member
Ian Pearson (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 November 2008
Reference
482 c79
House
House of Commons

The hon. Gentleman has just walked in; if he sits down and is patient, I might give way to him in a moment. Let me just make this basic point: other countries have compulsory schemes and their registration schemes are part of that. If we had a registration scheme, a...

Member
Ian Pearson (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 November 2008
Reference
482 c50-1
House
House of Commons

I understand my hon. Friend's point, but let me explain what we are doing. We are setting up a reclaim fund which will be a private company. We have made it clear that it is not the Government's intention to appoint members of the reclaim fund, and clause 5(4) does...

Member
Ian Pearson (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 November 2008
Reference
482 c62
House
House of Commons

When we discussed the matter before us in Committee, a strong view was expressed that the Government ought to return to it at an appropriate time, having reviewed the progress of the Bill and the operation of the reclaim fund. That feeling arose largely after the Government overturned amendments made...

Member
Ian Pearson (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 November 2008
Reference
482 c24
House
House of Commons

There are some differences between new clause 3 and new clause 2. I thought it right to let the hon. Member for Fareham (Mr. Hoban) explain why he prefers his clause when he has his go. The Government will want to publish the findings of any review that we undertake...

Member
Ian Pearson (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 November 2008
Reference
482 c25
House
House of Commons

We have had an interesting debate, which shows that there is not a great deal of difference about substance between all hon. Members who contributed. We all believe that a review is necessary, and most of the debate has centred around whether more than one review should take place and...

Member
Ian Pearson (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 November 2008
Reference
482 c35
House
House of Commons

Let me assure the House that we would commit to keeping the issue very much on the Government's agenda, but that would also depend on what the first review concluded. If the first review concluded that the scheme was working well—that there was extensive voluntary participation, that the reclaim fund...

Member
Ian Pearson (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 November 2008
Reference
482 c35-6
House
House of Commons