House of Commons · Bill Debate
26 June 2023 · 15 other contributors
Opened by Andrew Griffith Con Arundel and South Downs
Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.
Andrew Griffith raised concerns about financial services bill - lords amendment 35, government amendments (a) to (c) in lieu of lords amendment 7, lords amendment 10, government motion to disagree, and other related amendments in the House of Commons. Other MPs contributed to the debate.
Key points
MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said.
Opened the debate
The hon. Member Andrew Griffith moved that the House disagrees with Lords amendment 7. He proposed a series of government amendments in lieu of Lords amendment 7, which are designed to maintain regulatory oversight within the context of post-Brexit financial services regulations. The primary aim is to ensure that new responsibilities and powers transferred from EU law to UK regulators are appropriately managed and accountable.
Noted the engagement of financial privilege by Lords amendment 35 and outlined procedural steps to discuss several government amendments in lieu of lords amendments.
Supported the various amendments tabled by the Government, particularly Lords amendments 6, 11 and 16 to 25 which strengthen the accountability of FCA and PRA. She welcomed government concessions on free access to cash but expressed disappointment in the lack of protection for essential face-to-face services.
She supports the Bill, highlighting its benefits such as strengthening financial services and creating up to 2 million jobs across the UK. She also appreciates the new competitiveness and growth objective and the complaints function initiative which addresses poor regulatory responses. Leadsom is concerned about politically exposed persons (PEPs) affecting their offspring's ability to open bank accounts.
He criticises the Government for opposing some amendments that could address concerns, particularly Lords amendment 7 which does not give targets set by devolved nations of the UK equal status. He questions why the government opposes financial inclusion and supports Lords amendment 10 but is disappointed with the lack of progress on this issue. Grant also expresses concern about the closure of banks and post offices affecting access to cash, especially in deprived communities.
He interjected during Peter Grant's speech asking for clarification on who could be classified as a close associate under the politically exposed persons regulation. This intervention highlights ongoing concerns about how these regulations are defined.
He intervened to remind Members of the House not to directly criticise members of the House of Lords by name, maintaining decorum in debate proceedings.
Financial services should extend due diligence provisions to tackle illegal deforestation. The amendments will help prevent the loss of forest cover by ensuring companies monitor their supply chains more effectively. Financial sector support for this initiative is growing, with institutions like Aviva backing it.
Supports Lords amendment 27 as it will provide greater parliamentary oversight of financial services regulators. Amendment is important for consumer protection, especially in cases like the British Steel pension scheme scandal. Financial inclusion should be prioritised to protect vulnerable groups from exploitation by bad actors.
Argues against the closure of bank branches, particularly in rural areas like North Norfolk. He mentions that Lloyds Bank is closing two branches in his constituency and highlights the impact on elderly and vulnerable populations who rely heavily on cash. He calls for more investment in post offices as banking hubs.
[INTERVENTION] Agrees with Duncan Baker's concerns and adds that residents in his constituency have experienced similar issues with banks closing. He supports the Government’s move to retain access to cash for disadvantaged groups.
Supports amendments 72 to 77, emphasising the need to protect those who still use cash. She mentions a significant decline in free-to-use ATMs in her constituency and highlights the challenges faced by local businesses when card facilities are unavailable. She welcomes the Chancellor's acceptance of Lords amendments.
He supports amendments regarding accountability and scrutiny of regulators, emphasising international competitiveness. He welcomes the Government’s acceptance of changes in early stages. Alun Cairns highlights the importance of balancing consumer demands with business sustainability. He suggests forming a Joint Committee to scrutinise regulators’ activities and seeks clarification from the Minister on how this can be achieved effectively. He also supports clauses regarding cryptoassets, digital assets, and distributed ledger technology.
He endorses the Government’s amendments on accountability and transparency in financial regulation. Stephen Hammond supports measures to ensure international competitiveness and financial inclusion, highlighting that regulators already possess relevant powers under the consumer duty framework. He advocates for clear definitions of metrics in secondary legislation to assess regulatory effectiveness, market health, and international comparisons.
Amends 72-77 will protect the right to free cash access services for customers, vital for over-65s and those not banking online. Banks are profiting from high interest rate spread without passing benefits back to customers, especially those reliant on instant access accounts. These amendments will enshrine protection of depositing and withdrawing cash for free.
Acknowledges substantial steps taken by Government to enhance regulatory accountability through the Bill. Welcomes contributions on importance of access to cash, including support for hubs like that in Ealing Central and Acton. Banks must be held accountable and listened to debate about not just access to cash but face-to-face branch facilities.