Dormant Bank and Building Society Accounts Bill [HL]

As the noble Lord, Lord Newby, pointed out, there are some similarities between what he is proposing and the suggestions I made earlier. It is really a question of whether there is a case for amalgamating the data. I suggested that each individual bank should publish the list of the dormant account holders or perhaps subsequently the reclaim fund would do so; he is suggesting that the whole lot should be amalgamated. I suspect that would make the process quite difficult, even electronically. There is some attraction in not only having the list set up electronically—which is always a danger nowadays—but having it published in the press and so on. It would obviously be too big if all the banks’ and building societies’ dormant account lists were put into one lump. Other than that, I understand very well the arguments put forward by the noble Lord. He and I and a large number of the Committee are desperately anxious that priority should be given to reuniting the accounts with their rightful holders. Perhaps I may make one other point, which the right reverend Prelate put in my mind. I had assumed up to now that the advantage for the charities would be that as much money as possible would be put into the reclaim fund and then distributed. But that raises a distribution issue and I understand now the point being made. If an individual died and left a dormant account with £10 million in it to a particular charity, that charity might prefer to have the money than seeing the whole lot going into the general fund and having to rely on the lottery to allocate it. That is a matter the other side of the Committee will no doubt cover. I understand the noble Lord’s point and I await with interest what the Minister has to say in reply.