There will be a Private Notice Question today in the Chamber of the House of Lords. It will read as follows “To ask HMG, following the proposals announced yesterday, whether they will urgently report to the House how they will maintain an arm’s length relationship with the  banks in which they have taken a shareholding.’

PNQs are decided on by the Lord Speaker, in consultation with the “usual channels” (the leaders of the political groupings and in most cases also with the Convenor of the Crossbenches). The two criteria are that the topic be both important and urgent. The latter criterion is perhaps easeir to define; is  the question so urgent that it needs to be answered today and cannot wait until tomorrow. Importance generally refers to the national interest of a given matter.

This particular PNQ put forward by Lord Forsyth, a Tory Peer, has a history. During the seven hour debate yesterday on the financial/banking crisis, Lord Forsyth asked the Minister, Baroness Vadera, about the regulatory mechanisms already announced at the Treasury Select Committee meeting that same day. The Minister did not answer the question directly – hence the PNQ today.

One suspects that part of the reason for the question is the displeasure some in the House of Lords may feel that an important Government measure slips out at a Select Committee  meeting (albeit one which included the Chancellor, the Governor of the Bank of England and the Head of the Financial Services Authority) rather than being announced in both Houses which would allow for questions and comments.

The topic is clearly important but the urgency may have more to do with the fact that the question posed at yesterday’s debate was not fully answered!