I take my right hon. Friend's point. My point is that there will be extensive involvement and consultation as part of the review process. Whether the review team will be made up purely of Treasury officials or whether we want an independent person in charge, whoever they might be, is something that we can consider later, when drawing up the review.
My right hon. Friend also discussed the liquidation of BCCI. I stand to be corrected, but my understanding is that accounts from the former BCCI are not likely to be transferred into the reclaim fund or meet the requirement of dormancy, as defined in the Bill as drafted. Should that not be the case, however, I will endeavour to come back to him. However, the principle is that the scheme is voluntary and the reclaim fund is a private sector organisation. There is discretion on the part of the participating banks and building societies to interpret whether such accounts are dormant. That is one of the flexibilities in the system, which we believe to be one of its strengths.
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 c36 Session
2007-08Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-16 01:24:40 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_505388
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_505388
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_505388