Dormant Bank and Building Society Accounts Bill [HL]

moved Amendment No. 29: 29: Schedule 1, page 15, line 32, at end insert— ““(1A) Such information, as published under sub-paragraph (1), must be presented to Parliament.”” The noble Lord said: First, I associate myself with the noble Baroness’s most recent comments. This is the most pathetic sight one could imagine: two Ministers, supported by serried ranks of civil servants, being asked the simplest questions about the reclaim fund—the central feature of the Bill in terms of new bodies being established—and not only are they incapable of answering them, but they seem to think it is rather ridiculous that they are being asked. With all due respect, it is not for us to go scurrying around asking bodies outwith the Government how they believe the Government’s will is to be interpreted; it is for the Government to tell us how they expect things to operate. Amendment No. 29 is yet another minor amendment that I hope—but do not expect—that the Government might be able to accept. It is clear that the reclaim fund, despite the best efforts of Ministers to claim that it is nothing to do with them and that it is a private sector body, while not technically a public body, is at the very least a hybrid body. Since we tabled this amendment—indeed, during the course of this afternoon—it has become clear that far from being a neutral catalyst or a mere channel, the fund will have some knotty issues to deal with about how it divides up the money between what it retains and what it passes on. The fund is potentially subject to Treasury direction, so it seems wholly appropriate that Parliament should keep a close eye on it. All the amendment does is say that the fund should print an additional few envelopes every year and send its annual report to Parliament where it can be formally received and make it that much more likely that committees in another place and noble Lords in your Lordships’ House will be able to scrutinise what the reclaim fund is doing. I beg to move.