Results 1-20 of 255 for in the 'Commons debates' OR in the 'Westminster Hall debates' OR in the 'Lords debates' OR in the 'Northern Ireland Assembly debates' speaker:Lord Blackwell

Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Bill: Report (4th Day) (Continued) (11 March 2013)

Lord Blackwell: My Lords, I have listened very carefully to the speeches of the noble Lords, Lord Mitchell and Lord Lea of Crondall. While they made some interesting points, I did not find that either of them had any compelling rationale for this particular amendment. We have all agreed that the remuneration policy for those at the top of companies has to be transparent and has to be voted on and agreed by...

Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Bill: Report (4th Day) (Continued) (11 March 2013)

Lord Blackwell: That is precisely my point. I would have thought that the company that successfully employs lots of people at all skill levels, including those on the minimum wage or at a low-skill level, is helping society and helping us all to prosper together. Another example is a company in a consultancy that employs only PhDs. The ratio between the top and the bottom in that company may be relatively...

Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Bill: Report (4th Day) (Continued) (11 March 2013)

Lord Blackwell: My Lords, I am sure that all of us who are directors of public companies agree with the spirit of the Bill: that directors have an obligation to carry shareholders with them and to win their support for policies on remuneration as on other matters. However, the noble Lord's particular point about having a special resolution to approve remuneration policy I found very difficult to follow. I am...

Financial Services Bill — Report (2nd Day) (Continued) (12 November 2012)

Lord Blackwell: My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lords who have spoken to my amendment and to my noble friend the Minister for his response, in particular for his statement that he and the Government are sympathetic to its aims. It is a very difficult issue. As he and I recognise, full advice based on a full fact find is a very expensive process. Only a small proportion of the population with significant...

Financial Services Bill — Report (2nd Day) (Continued) (12 November 2012)

Lord Blackwell: My Lords, in moving Amendment 25F I should ask the House to take note of my interests as set out in the register. The purpose of this amendment is to make it explicit that the FCA is able and, indeed, required to balance the absolute objective of consumer protection against the desirability of ensuring that the costs and risks of regulation do not result in customer detriment by discouraging...

Financial Services Bill — Report (2nd Day) (12 November 2012)

Lord Blackwell: My Lords, it is difficult to disagree with the objective of appropriate codes of conduct in this industry but I am left wondering what the amendment adds to the state of current regulations. As the noble Baroness will know, there is a regime of approved persons in the industry and to be an approved person, and to hold any position of responsibility in financial services, you are required to...

Financial Services Bill — Report (1st Day) (6 November 2012)

Lord Blackwell: My Lords, despite the cogent words of the noble Lord, Lord Myners, I share the confusion on this side of the House about what these amendments are intended to do. Everyone agrees that it is vital that there should be strong oversight of the governor and the executives of the Bank by the non-executive directors and that we have proper accountability and scrutiny. But what is proposed here is a...

Financial Services Bill: Committee (8th Day) (17 October 2012)

Lord Blackwell: Before the noble Lord responds, clearly one area where the FCA has particular responsibilities are competition issues relating to the industry. Can my noble friend put on the record that, if a competition issue is raised in a crisis management situation, there will be an explicit expectation that the FCA would be involved it that?

Financial Services Bill: Committee (2nd Day) (3 July 2012)

Lord Blackwell: My Lords, I apologise to the House that I was unable to contribute to the Second Reading debate. The fact that all these amendments recognise the interlinking of financial stability policy and the wider economic objectives is a major step forward. However, the amendment proposed by the noble Lord, Lord Eatwell, is mistaken in its wording. It is a fallacy to believe that monetary policy and...

Economy: Deficit Reduction — Question (15 December 2011)

Lord Blackwell: My Lords, does my noble friend accept that the primary reason for our current deficit is the fact that public expenditure as a percentage of GDP grew from less than 40 per cent to close to 50 per cent in the first 10 years of this century? Will he confirm that the Government's primary focus is therefore to get public expenditure back down below 40 per cent, where it can be supported by an...

International Monetary Fund — Question (24 November 2011)

Lord Blackwell: My Lords, does my noble friend agree that it is undesirable for the IMF or indeed any other agency to fund the debts of any particular country unless that country has a sustainable plan to restore its international competitiveness?

European Union Bill: Commons Amendments and Reasons (13 July 2011)

Lord Blackwell: My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Liddle, called his amendment sensible. We should be clear that it is a wrecking amendment. It requires the Government to assert that a proposal is of major constitutional and economic significance. The noble Lord himself said that no Government voluntarily submit to a referendum. No proposal would come into the scope of this Bill unless the Government had...

Education Bill — Second Reading (Continued) (14 June 2011)

Lord Blackwell: My Lords, like other noble Lords, I welcome the Bill, especially the focus on helping with discipline, the greater freedoms for academies and the emphasis on measuring ourselves against international standards. However, I want to focus on one area which is ignored in the Bill and has been neglected in government legislation so far, and I should like to explore whether it could be added to the...

NHS: Future Forum — Statement (14 June 2011)

Lord Blackwell: My Lords, I add my congratulations to my noble friend on his Statement which has certainly reassured me that the principles in the White Paper have been maintained. Can he elaborate a little more on the development of competition and choice to which he referred? The Statement says that Monitor's core duty will be to protect and promote the interests of patients, not to promote competition as...

European Union Bill: Committee (7th Day) (23 May 2011)

Lord Blackwell: The noble Lord will not be surprised that I cannot agree with his amendment. Arguments are put forward for the merits of our membership of the European Union and arguments are put forward about some of the disadvantages and costs of our membership. Where Members of this House and people in this country will disagree is in the balance of those arguments. The noble Lord cannot really be serious...

European Union Bill: Committee (7th Day) (23 May 2011)

Lord Blackwell: I think that that just illustrates the point that different Members of this Committee will have different views on this matter. My view is that if there has been a bias in the past, it has been for Ministers, in their desire to get the agreement of the House and the country to treaty changes, to downplay some of the consequences of those treaty changes that they did not wish the country to...

European Union Bill: Committee (7th Day) (23 May 2011)

Lord Blackwell: Perhaps I may give way to the noble Lord, Lord Hannay.

European Union Bill: Committee (7th Day) (23 May 2011)

Lord Blackwell: I may be corrected, but I am not aware that there is any statutory requirement for Ministers to make positive speeches about either of those organisations. It is up to Ministers to take their view and to make those views known. That is all I am saying about the European Union; namely, that it is up to Ministers to take a view and make that view known but that they should be allowed and,...

European Union Bill: Committee (4th Day) (9 May 2011)

Lord Blackwell: My Lords, I oppose the amendment for the opposite reasons to those that the noble Lord, Lord Liddle, and others gave for promoting it. It is important that it is very clear that the UK Government are not enabled to support or enable moves to go forward in Europe that imply a treaty change or a substantive shift in competences, without it being very clear that the UK Government must have...

European Union Bill: Committee (4th Day) (9 May 2011)

Lord Blackwell: I am suggesting that because, as the noble Lord will know, in Councils in Europe if you abstain or are simply absent from the meeting you do not prevent binding decisions being taken that would have an impact on the UK. If there is a decision about something that implies a transfer of competence from the UK of the kind that this Bill deals with, I would not want a situation where the noble...