Lord Myners

Monday 15 March was a particularly busy day for me in the House.  The day started with a question from Lord Pearson of Rannoch (the leader of UKIP) on whether the UK could be required to provide financial assistance to an EU Member State “threatened with severe difficulties”.  After answering Lord Pearson’s tabled and supplementary question I had to field questions from other peers on the same subject for that part of the allocated 7½ minutes that remained outstanding. In practice I was let off rather lightly as a fair amount of time was taken up as peers endeavoured to establish their right to ask the next question on the subject.  Eventually the Leader of the House, Baroness Royall of Blaisdon, stepped in to provide much appreciated guidance.  The questioning ended with Lord Tebbit asking me to confirm that I would forthright resign if any costs fell on the British taxpayer in respect of any bail-out of Greece.  Lord Tebbit and Lord Pearson are both regular bloggers elsewhere.

After the 4th and last of the standard questions we had a Private Notice Question from the excellent Baroness Hananm on the subject of the industrial dispute at British Airways.  Lord Adonis answered her and other peers with aplomb and confidence.

Shortly thereafter, I had to stand at the despatch box to move Draft Regulations in connection with Child Trust Funds.  I had presented these to Grand Committee in the Moses Room on 8 March.  The motion was agreed without debate.

I then had a break of a little more than an hour which gave me an opportunity to get back to Horse Guards Road for Treasury business while the Third Reading of the Digital Economy Bill took place in the Chamber.  This Bill was passed and sent to the Commons shortly before 5:30pm when I laid draft Orders before the House on Child Benefit Up-rating.  This is an annual exercise and a vital part of our commitment to reduce child poverty, a matter on which we have made great progress.  Neither the Conservatives nor the Liberals opposed  the Order, although Baroness Noakes and Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay both seized the opportunity to ask questions from the front benches.

Baroness Noakes, as always, evidenced her assiduous attention to detail and preparation with a series of technical questions.  Lord Oakeshott was rather the more political, not missing the opportunity to score a point off the Conservatives on their generous proposals to lift the inheritance tax threshold.  Lord Martin of Springburn, the former Speaker of the House of Commons, raised a couple of interesting questions relating to Guardians Allowance.  The motion was agreed within twenty minutes.

My next task was to lay draft Regulations before the House to secure approval for amendments to Social Security Contributions.  Baroness Noakes and Lord Oakeshott again replied.  The Regulations were approved.

This brought the House to the second day of the Committee Stage of the Financial Services Bill.  The Bill comprises thirty-nine clauses over fifty-one pages.  Conservatives peers have already tabled over three hundred amendments.  The first full day of the Committee Stage, on Wednesday 10 March, got as far as Clause 2.

This Bill is a critical element in the Government’s response to the financial crisis.  Measures include the establishment of a Council for Financial Stability to refine and enhance the tripartite process that brings together the work of the Treasury, the Bank of England, and the Financial Services Authority, and important measures to enhance consumer redress and protect and compensate consumers.  Over the ensuing three hours (the House rose at 9:55pm with an hour from 7.30pm spent on the dinner debate on the Licensing Act) we managed to get to, but not beyond, Clause 5.  Baroness Noakes tested the opinion of the House on two occasions by calling for votes.  On both votes her amendments were rejected with a clear majority.

The debate was a fine example of the strength the House draws from the diversity and experience of its members.  Baroness Noakes again led for the Conservatives.  Her questioning is to the point and precisely expressed.  She has developed a fine style in expressing indignation and exasperation with my responses to her Amendments (most of which centre on the word ‘resist’), whilst with good humour comforting herself and others with the thought that “we won’t have to put up with you for much longer” (my words, not those of the Baroness).  Baroness Noakes is a former partner of the accountants KPMG, member of the Court of the Bank of England, and public company director, including Hanson and ICI.  Her experience is evident in her confident performance.  Lord Newby led for the Liberal Democrats.  Lord Newby’s approach is different from that of the Baroness.  Whereas the Baroness is drawn to detail, Lord Newby has a masterful grasp of “the big picture”.  His contributions are invariably wise and command the respect of the whole House.  His wide experience include tax, property and consultancy.

Contributions to the debate from the back benches came exclusively from the Conservative side – the Labour benches were clearly very happy with the Bill and felt no need to speak although they were there in force to vote when called upon.

Contributors from the Conservative benches included Lord Northbrook, an elected hereditary peer, highly experienced fund manager and scion of the Baring family and Lord Hodgson of Astley Abbots, a former investment banker, brewery and building society director. I should also make particular mention of two former Treasury ministers who spoke from the Conservative benches.  Lord Higgins, was Financial Secretary from 1972 to 1974 and is a renowned monetarist.  He is greatly respected by all for his experience, wisdom and unqualified courteousness.  He springs to his feet to ask a question or make a point with an energy which belies the fact that he represented Great Britain in the 1950 Commonwealth Games where he gained a silver medal and was a member of the British Olympic team in 1948 (the year of my birth!).  Lady Higgins is one of our most eminent lawyers, formerly President of the International Court of Justice in the Hague.  Lord Stewartby was an Economic Secretary. He was until 2004 Deputy Chairman of Standard Chartered Bank and no doubt played a very important role in cementing the strong base from which that bank has grown over recent years.  He exhibits all the commendable qualities that one associates with a respected banker.

Lord Lawson of Blaby, the former Chancellor of Exchequer made an interesting intervention in which he suggested I owed the House an apology for making a misleading statement in the Second Reading on 23rd February. In that debate I said “Arguably, the only advanced economy able to largely withstand the banking crises was Canada and its regulatory structure is very similar to our own”.  I have great respect for Lord Lawson.  I made a conditional apology to the House although I said that I was not convinced that the noble Lord was correct.  Much depends upon the word ‘similar’.  To me this means having a resemblance or sharing some characteristics in common.  I believe that I am correct in that the Canadian system keeps separate the responsibilities of central banking and regulation, unlike current Tory proposals.  I have written to Lord Lawson.  He may or may not reply but until I receive a reply I have ‘downed tools’ on re-reading the former Chancellor’s memoires ‘The View from No. 11’ ,published in 1992, and turned my reading attention to John Kay’s recently published ‘Obliquity’ [I had reached page 166 (nuclear energy) of Lord’s 1,100 page tome].  Lord Howard of Rising made a number of interventions at one point he said of me “I believe the noble Lord has led a very sheltered life”.  Lord Howard is described by Wikipedia as “A member of the influencial Howard family”.  He is a former Private Secretary to Enoch Powell and has been described by the Daily Telegraph as a committed Eurosceptic, supporter of Iain Duncan Smith, gambling associate and confidant of the late Lord Lucan and someone who on more than one occasion loaned his home in Westminster to prospective Tory leadership candidates.  I suppose I must look to have led a very sheltered life by comparison!

I was ably assisted throughout the debate by two Government whips – Lord Davies of Oldham and Lord Tunnicliffe.  Lord Davies has become a very good friend and advisor.  No new minister and peer could have been more ably supported.

I was introduced to the House of Lords (as Lord Myners of Truro, in the County of Cornwall) on 21 October 2008, having been appointed a Minister in HM Treasury on 3 October 2008.  Ahead of my appointment I was told that I would not have to spend much time in the House of Lords which appeared to be good news at that time given that my Ministerial responsibilities included Banking, an industry then in the midst of a perfect storm.

I am the first peer to serve as a minister in the Treasury since the Earl of Caithness who was Paymaster General in 1989-1990 and only the second life peer (the other being Lord Cockfield, a former finance director of Boots, who served as a minister of state at the Treasury in the early 1980’s before joining the European Commission)

It is a great honour to be a member of the House of Lords.  I never enter the Chamber without feeling a great sense of privilege and duty.  I still have a great deal to learn – I still miss-address the bishops and leading figures from the military and law.  I always seem to be standing up when I should be seated and visa versa (Lord Tunnicliffe is razor sharp in these matters).  But there is a tremendous amount of goodwill in the House and advice warmly offered from all sides and appreciated.

I am a regular reader of Lord of the Blogs which I continue to find most informative.  I am making this contribution at the suggestion of Lord Soley.  The words are mine.  They have not been reviewed by Treasury officials.

Lord Myners of Truro