Dormant Bank and Building Society Accounts Bill [Lords]

Let me reverse the position of amendment No. 10 for a moment. If clause 5(4) were not in the Bill—precisely what the amendment is designed to achieve—and I moved an amendment to put the same wording of subsection (4) back into the Bill, I suspect that the Government would respond by arguing that it was unnecessary and there was no need for it—[Interruption.] The hon. Member for Fareham (Mr. Hoban) is looking puzzled; I am saying that if I attempted to insert that wording into the Bill, the Government would probably say, ““We don't need it; it is redundant””, as they often do in respect of amendments coming from both sides of the House. We are told that we do not understand and that there is no need for the amending provision. If I ask what clause 5(4) does—if, as one anticipates, the Government resist amendment No. 10, which would remove that provision—the answer is that it gives the Treasury a power that I suspect it needs, because I cannot see anywhere else in the Bill where it defines who the members of the reclaim fund are. It will be a company, which has to have members—the shareholders—although I know that the Bill provides that they are not going to get dividends. It seems to me that clause 5(4) is needed on account of this lacuna, whereby the members of ““the”” or ““a”” reclaim fund are not specified. I appreciate from paragraph 51 of the explanatory notes that the"““British Bankers' Association and Building Societies Association have committed to lead on the selection or establishment of a body to act as a reclaim fund.””" However, when the Minister responds to the blandishments of the official Opposition on amendment No. 10, I hope that he can elucidate on that and clarify whether I am right that clause 5(4) is necessary because the Bill does not specify who the members of a reclaim fund should be. It would be for the members of that fund to carry out enforcement if the directors failed to give effect to specified objects or to comply with the provisions in the memorandum of association and articles of the fund. Usually, one would expect the members of the company— with a limited guarantee or otherwise—to be responsible for enforcement. It is for them to say, ““You are not complying with the rules of our organisation or company. As directors, you should be, so if necessary, we will take you to court to get you to comply””. If one does not know who the members are, however, one cannot say that the watchdog power exists, which is why subsection (4) is necessary.