My Lords, the issue to bear in mind here is that of giving a voluntary scheme the chance to work. I again declare an interest as a member of the Commission on Unclaimed Assets. In discussions with banks and building societies showed that they were extremely reluctant at the beginning to come into a scheme—and in some cases even to admit the existence of these assets. That is why it has remained a voluntary scheme.
I have two points to make. First, I want to pay credit to the charitable sector for all that it has done in bringing this issue into the public arena. It is entirely through the efforts of some individuals in the charitable sector that we are discussing this Bill at all, or even are aware of the existence of large amounts of unclaimed assets. That is very praiseworthy indeed.
Secondly, we should remember how the money is going to be distributed. If, as I hope, some of the money—perhaps quite a large amount—is going to go to the wholesaler, who will distribute that money further? Again, the focus is on making the capacity of the third greater than it currently is. We should not assume that if we do not pass this amendment the charitable sector will be forgotten—on the contrary.
Dormant Bank and Building Society Accounts Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Pitkeathley
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 29 January 2008.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Dormant Bank and Building Society Accounts Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
698 c566-7 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-16 01:34:11 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_440098
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_440098
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_440098