Saving Gateway Accounts Bill

I agree with the noble Baroness that there is not much between the position she has adumbrated and that of the Government so far as the Bill is concerned. It is our intention to apply the conditions set out in the draft regulations. We propose that people can be eligible for the saving gateway only by virtue of entitlement to tax credits where their income does not exceed a specified threshold or where they are entitled to one of the social security benefits specified in Section 7(2) of the Tax Credits Act. The amendments would require that such conditions must be applied in regulations, whereas the current subsections provide the flexibility for this and future governments not to do so. I have set out our intentions with regard to the legislation, but we think it right that the Bill should allow some flexibility for the future. I should say to the noble Baroness that if I had £5 for every time I have replied to an Opposition amendment which would replace "may" with "shall", I would be very wealthy indeed. This is another clear case where it looks desirable that there should be some determination because we agree about the intention of how the scheme will work. We have "may" rather than "shall" so often in legislation, and we are not the first Administration to do so. Gladstone’s Administration probably set up the practice, if not even earlier than that. I use Gladstone as an illustration to try to get the noble Lord, Lord Newby, on board. The obvious fact is that governments have an intent. They have a Bill that they intend to turn into law which should work according to the parameters of the time. "May" comes into legislation instead of "shall" because legislation is primary and cannot easily be amended. Replacement by primary legislation is a fearsome task and governments want to preserve a degree of flexibility for the future, if only to have regard to the trials and tribulations of those who come after them. I speak almost in hereditary terms about Labour, of course, but I have to expect that at some time in the future we might have to contemplate a Liberal Administration—I know that the noble Baroness was rising to that possibility with enthusiasm—or even a Conservative one. Within that framework, I want to defend the necessary flexibility. As time evolves and circumstances change, this legislation will still hold good for the concept of the saving gateway. We are at one with the noble Baroness, which is why we built in the requirements. We will operate it and we have already indicated in our draft regulations that that is how we intend to apply it. We have some regard for flexibility in legislation. I hope that I have succeeded in persuading the noble Baroness of the virtues of that approach.