We mean when the reclaim scheme itself is up and running. I think that it is right that there is a period of time between the passing of the Bill and the setting up of the reclaim fund. It seemed to us—we explored this in Committee—that three years was about the right length of time. In actual fact, it will be slightly less than that, because we would have to report in that period.
Let me turn to the scope of the review. As I have said, it will consider the effectiveness of the legislation. That was a point that my hon. Friend the Member for High Peak (Tom Levitt) and other Labour Members raised. It will not attempt to review areas outside the legislation, such as the Financial Services Authority's prudential regulation of the reclaims funds, management of money. It is right that FSA regulation is a matter for the FSA. We expect the regulator to make its own assessment of the effectiveness of its regime, too.
New clause 2 does the same thing, in essence, as new clause 3. We naturally prefer our clause and think that new clause 2 is unnecessary as a result. The Government have listened and we have acted as a result of the representations that were made in Committee, and that is why we commend the new clause to the House.
Dormant Bank and Building Society Accounts Bill [Lords]
Proceeding contribution from
Ian Pearson
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Monday, 3 November 2008.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Dormant Bank and Building Society Accounts Bill [Lords].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
482 c24-5 Session
2007-08Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-16 01:21:39 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_505357
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_505357
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_505357