Dormant Bank and Building Society Accounts Bill [HL]

I thank all noble Lords who have spoken. The noble Lord, Lord Shutt, asked about my hierarchy of ambition. My only ambition for Committee stage is to test the logical limits of the Government’s position on the various aspects of the drafting of their scheme. One will then regroup and decide on the most important areas to take further. If the noble Lord, Lord Shutt, wants a more detailed answer, he must buy me a drink in the bar afterwards. The noble Lord, Lord Newby, was absolutely right to say that the number of causes that could benefit from this money is infinite. However, is the Big Lottery Fund the right place through which to launder the money? That is the question being posed by my amendment. In case there was any misunderstanding, when I suggested that money be provided for the Armed Forces, I did not mean that it should buy guns and uniforms for them, I meant that it should support servicemen and their families for the things that make their lives better and in ways that are not related to armed operations. My noble friend Lord Skelmersdale asked a question on national charities, which is an important issue, because if the money goes into the Big Lottery Fund, it has to be shared between the countries. How does a national charity fit in with that scheme? That is another reason why I thought that an alternative scheme that would reflect national issues was important. The Minister then said: ““Ah, but this is terrible, because the Secretary of State will be making decisions without reference to the devolved Administrations””; but the Secretary of State makes decisions as a cabinet colleague and I believe that there are cabinet colleagues representing Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, although they are part-time. I do not have a particular problem with that. The Minister then said that the Government were seeking to enlist the willing support and co-operation of those whose funds were to be liberated by the Bill; but if the Minister has read the comments of the British Bankers’ Association on the amendments, he will have seen that it regards where the money goes as a matter of public policy that does not concern it. Its main concerns are the arrangements for how money is gathered in and not how it is spent. The BBA does not regard itself as having a say in that; it has left that to the Government, so this is a question that we should debate. I will reflect further before we come back on Report. My previous amendment was on the lifeboat, which I continue to believe is a very important cause. This amendment reflects that the Bill is not robust in the face of very differing outcomes in terms of amounts collected through the scheme and does not allow some national projects to be supported, so I regard this issue as having continuing importance. Time moves on and, for today, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.