UK Parliament / Open data

Dormant Bank and Building Society Accounts Bill [HL]

I never thought I would see the day when the noble Baroness was eager to see the Treasury have additional powers, certainly not while I was standing at this Dispatch Box, but she is, and I can emphasise to her on principle that I disagree. This is a private scheme and the law is meant to be applied with a light touch. As we have argued for a good part of this afternoon, the Government’s perspective is that the framework of the scheme must have the minimum of prescription. The noble Baroness is threatening the participants in this private scheme, who have given many assurances on how they intend to activate it, and suggesting to them that what lies in wait is the Treasury’s interestingly heavy hand on further potential definitions of dormant or not dormant. We do not think this amendment is necessary. Banks and building societies have indicated how they intend to interpret the scheme. We are providing in legislation the necessary prescription to make the scheme work. We do not think that it is consistent with the philosophy behind the Bill to have an element in it indicating that the Treasury may have second thoughts. I hope the noble Baroness will see that my reservations on this account may even be shared by some on her own side.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
697 c353GC 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Back to top