This conversation is getting more and more arcane. I conceded in my opening remarks that although on the face of it the Bill is quite straightforward, it has a few unusual features. We are navigating waters that have not previously been explored in this country, although similar schemes exist in other countries. There is therefore merit in having a review. Having said that, I think there is merit in periodically reviewing every piece of legislation that the Government introduce to see whether it has the intended effect.
In new clause 3, the Government make the useful concession of allowing a formal review. I do not want to be mean-spirited, because they have moved on this: they have listened to the concerns that have been expressed and, in a healthily non-partisan manner, sought within the bounds of what they regard as practicable to bring forward proposals that can command broad support. The Opposition parties may wish the Government to commit to further reviews, which would be desirable, but I can see why they would be reluctant to support the rather loosely drafted new clause 2.
Dormant Bank and Building Society Accounts Bill [Lords]
Proceeding contribution from
Jeremy Browne
(Liberal Democrat)
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 c32 Session
2007-08Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-16 01:20:56 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_505376
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_505376
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_505376