Saving Gateway Accounts Bill

Amendment 26 amends Clause 5, which deals with the regulations associated with the approval of account providers. The amendment says that the regulations may require account holders to be eligible for compensation under the Financial Services Compensation Scheme and eligible for access to the Financial Services Ombudsman. The amendment is permissive; I do not see how the Government can possibly object to it. Indeed, the regulations provide for an account to be covered by the FSCS or an equivalent in another member state or EEA state. I am aware that it is difficult, although not impossible, to exclude other members of the EU, but I am less clear about EEA states. Thinking back to the problems that we have had with Icelandic banks and some of the other EEA states, I do not think that it necessarily inspires confidence in financial terms. The regulations do not refer to access to the Financial Services Ombudsman, which I thought was desirable given the valuable work that the ombudsman does, especially in relation to relatively small accounts. Why are the requirements on the compensation scheme and the ombudsman not in the Bill? It is jolly difficult to see why the Government would want flexibility here. Do the Government intend to include EEA states and, if so, what safeguards will there be for account holders? The experience of relying on Icelandic deposit protection does not give us any confidence in the EEA being problem-free. Will the Minister also set out the position as regards the ombudsman? Do the Government believe that it is necessary for the saving gateway account holders to have access to the ombudsman? I certainly believe that that would be desirable. I am not even clear myself what the position would be if a branch bank from another EU state or possibly even an EEA state were to offer a saving gateway account. Could the Minister help the Committee in that respect? I beg to move.