Financial Services Bill
Debate between Lord Borrie and Lord Flight(14Ā years, 2Ā months ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Flight
My Lords, it strikes me that the Bill slightly buries ābuyer bewareā, which was in FiSMA, and that we are creeping towards a culture where a lot of people think that if they lose money on any investment they are entitled to compensation. I do not wish to be overly harsh but it is fundamental, as the noble Lord said, that people understand risk and graduations of risk. That is backed by financial education.
Lord Borrie
My Lords, in agreeing with my noble friends Lord Barnett and Lord Peston in their amendment, I agree also with what the noble Lord, Lord Flight, has just said. He did not used the famous Latin phrase ācaveat emptorā, perhaps because we are not supposed to use Latin any moreāthat is the case in the courts; it may be not so here. If it is convenient to the Committee, I shall speak to Amendment 106, which is grouped with my noble friendsā amendment.
The Bill states that the Financial Conduct Authority, in assessing the degree of consumer protection that is desirable,
āmust have regard to ā¦ the needs that consumers may have for the timely provision of information and advice that is accurate and fit for purposeā.
The noble Baroness, Lady Oppenheim-Barnes, has kindly joined me in Amendment 106, because, while we agree about information and advice having to be accurate, we are not happy about the phrase āfit for purposeā and would prefer it to be replaced by āintelligibleā.
āFit for purposeā is a vague and uncertain phrase. As the consumer organisation Which? has said in briefing to me and no doubt to others, it is a woolly phrase and invites the question: whose purpose? It has become fashionable to use the phrase āfit for purposeā for all sorts of reasons, and despite its perfectly respectable origins in Section 14 of the Sale of Goods Act and indeed previous common law, it is now used to such a wide extent in all sorts of circumstances that it would be better replaced in the Bill with āintelligibleā.