Financial Services (Banking Reform) Bill — New Clause 8 — Review Of Competitiveness of Those Providing Core Banking Services in the UK — 9 Jul 2013 at 16:15

John Penrose MP, Weston-Super-Mare voted against requiring a study into competition between UK financial services institutions involved in the core services of accepting deposits, providing facilities to withdraw money and make payments and the provision of overdraft facilities.

The majority of MPs voted against requiring a study into competition between UK financial services institutions involved in the core services of accepting deposits, providing facilities to withdraw money and make payments and the provision of overdraft facilities.

MPs were considering the Financial Services (Banking Reform) Bill[1]. The text of the clause rejected in this vote was:

  • (1) The Chancellor of the Exchequer shall instruct the Competition and Markets Authority to begin a full market study, according to its powers under the Enterprise Act 2002, into UK financial services institutions involved in the provision of core services.
  • (2) The full market study will consider:
  • (a) the level of competition among UK institutions involved in the provision of core services.
  • (b) the obstacles to increasing competition for UK institutions involved in the provision of core services.
  • (c) possible actions that could be taken to facilitate new UK institutions being competitive in the provision of core services.
  • (3) The full market study will be published within a year of Royal Assent of this Act.
  • (4) The review must result in a report to the Treasury.
  • (5) The Treasury shall lay a copy of the report before both Houses of Parliament.’.

Core services are defined, via clause 4 of the Bill[2], as

  • (a) facilities for the accepting of deposits or other payments into an account which is provided in the course of carrying on the core activity of accepting deposits;
  • (b) facilities for withdrawing money or making payments from such an account;
  • (c) overdraft facilities in connection with such an account.

==

Debate in Parliament | Source |

Party Summary

Votes by party, red entries are votes against the majority for that party.

What is Tell? '+1 tell' means that in addition one member of that party was a teller for that division lobby.

What are Boths? An MP can vote both aye and no in the same division. The boths page explains this.

What is Turnout? This is measured against the total membership of the party at the time of the vote.

PartyMajority (No)Minority (Aye)BothTurnout
Alliance0 10100.0%
Con248 (+1 tell) 0081.6%
DUP0 5062.5%
Green0 10100.0%
Independent0 1050.0%
Lab0 214 (+2 tell)083.7%
LDem44 (+1 tell) 0080.4%
PC0 2066.7%
SDLP0 2066.7%
SNP0 4066.7%
Total:292 230081.8%

Rebel Voters - sorted by party

MPs for which their vote in this division differed from the majority vote of their party. You can see all votes in this division, or every eligible MP who could have voted in this division

Sort by: Name | Constituency | Party | Vote

NameConstituencyPartyVote
no rebellions

About the Project

The Public Whip is a not-for-profit, open source website created in 2003 by Francis Irving and Julian Todd and now run by Bairwell Ltd.

There are lots of plans afoot, including extensive redevelopment of the site and plans for new functionality. To keep up with what's happening, please check out the blog. We're working on updating all the contact details throughout the site, but if you'd like to talk to us about the project, please email team@publicwhip.org.uk

The Whip on the Web

Advertisement - Helping keeping PublicWhip alive