Financial Services Bill — Clause 22 — Financial Conduct Authority — Power to Set Rules on Setting Remuneration — 22 May 2012 at 18:15

The majority of MPs voted against empowering the Financial Conduct Authority to set rules requiring, within certain bodies, an employee representative on the remuneration committee, and for remuneration consultants advising on remuneration policy to be appointed by the shareholders.

MPs were considering the Financial Services Bill[1]. The amendment rejected in this vote was:

  • Amendment 38, page 82, line 10, at end insert—
  • ‘(c) provide for a requirement that an employee representative should be a member of the remuneration committee of a relevant body corporate, and
  • (d) provide for a requirement that the remuneration consultants advising on remuneration policy shall be appointed by the shareholders of a relevant body corporate.’.

Had it not been rejected the above new subclause would have been added to Clause 22 of the Bill[2] which provided for a new part to be added to the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 replacing the chapter on Rule-making Powers with a new version. The chapter replaced sets out the powers of the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority to make rules as part of their regulatory roles.

Specifically the amendment sought to add clauses to a section titled General rules about remuneration.

Debate in Parliament | Source |

Public Whip is run as a free not-for-profit free service. If you'd like to support us, please consider switching your electricity and/or gas to Bulb Energy who provide 100% renewable electricity and tend to be 20% cheaper than the 'Big Six'. They'll also pay any exit fees (up to £120) from your old supplier AND give you (and us) a £50 credit for joining up via our Bulb Referral Link.

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%
Con241 (+2 tell) 0079.4%
DUP0 5062.5%
Green0 10100.0%
Independent0 10100.0%
Lab0 207 (+2 tell)081.3%
LDem44 0077.2%
PC0 30100.0%
Respect0 10100.0%
SDLP0 1033.3%
SNP0 5083.3%
Total:285 225079.8%

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

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.

PublicWhip v2 codebase is currently under development - you can join the Slack group to find out more or email [email protected]

The Whip on the Web

Help keep PublicWhip alive