division_name: Banking (Special Provisions) Bill [Ways and Means] &#8212; Clause 2 &#8212; Cases where Treasury's powers are exercisable
motion: <p class="" pid="d.253.0/1" pwmotiontext="yes">I beg to move amendment No. 1, in page 2, line 2, leave out "Treasury consider" and insert "Bank of England considers".</p>
  
  <p class="" pid="d.253.0/2" pwmotiontext="yes">This amendment is simple and does not require a lengthy explanation, but it is important and I alluded to it on Second Reading. The amendment proposes that the Bank of England rather than the Treasury should advise on whether there is a serious threat to the stability of the UK financial system. The Bank has a detailed knowledge of that system and can better judge it from inside than some civil servants at one end of Whitehall.</p>
  
  <p class="" pid="d.255.1/1" pwmotiontext="yes">I beg to move amendment No. 10, in page 2, line 40, leave out 'year' and insert 'month'.</p>
  
  <p class="" pid="d.255.1/2" pwmotiontext="yes">The amendment seeks to replace the provision in clause 2(8), which gives a limited period of one year for making an order under sections 3 and 6 of the legislation, with a provision for a limit of one month. I should say at the outset that this is not intended to be a wrecking amendment&#8212;far from it. We have already debated the overall principle of the Bill and we are now looking at its working realities.</p>
  
  <p pid="d.259.3/1" pwmotiontext="yes"><i> Question put,</i> That the amendment be made:&#8212;</p>
  
  <p pid="d.259.3/2" pwmotiontext="yes"><i> The Committee divided:</i> Ayes 222, Noes 302.</p>