In general this has been a thoughtful debate, to which wide-ranging contributions have been made.
My right hon. Friend the Member for Holborn and St. Pancras (Frank Dobson) pointed out that the Government had to step in because of market failure, because of the problems created by a global credit crunch and United States sub-prime lending, and because of Northern Rock's particular business model, which put a United Kingdom bank at risk and posed a potential risk to the rest of the banking system. The Government acted in the autumn to keep Northern Rock running, in order to save the bank and also to prevent the risk from spreading.
I agree with the hon. Member for Stratford-on-Avon (Mr. Maples)—if it is possible to agree with him and with my right hon. Friend the Member for Holborn and St. Pancras at the same time—that the most important aspect is the wider stability of the banking system. That is why we were right to intervene, but it is also why we are right to decide to continue the guarantees and ongoing support for Northern Rock in a way that will secure the best possible deal for the taxpayer, safeguarding both the taxpayer's interests and the wider interests of the financial system.
Banking (Special Provisions) Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Yvette Cooper
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 19 February 2008.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Banking (Special Provisions) Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
472 c227-8 Session
2007-08Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 23:09:25 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_446190
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_446190
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_446190