Dormant Bank and Building Society Accounts Bill [Lords]

May I deal with some of the comments that the Minister made? Amendment No. 11 proposes the publication of the names of the banks and building societies that have not contributed to the reclaim fund. I do not mind if they have to explain to the public why they have not contributed. If their argument is that they do not have dormant accounts or retail deposits, that is a fine explanation. I am more interested in those that have dormant retail accounts and do not make transfers to the reclaim fund. It should be easy for people to identify those institutions, and that is why I tabled the amendment. On amendments Nos. 10 and 11, we are in the curious position of having a power that the Government do not expect to use. It is very difficult for the Minister to define when they would use it. When challenged by my hon. Friend the Member for Broxbourne (Mr. Walker) on remuneration, the Minister pointed out that schedule 1 requires the fund to incur only reasonable expenses and said that the FSA could look after remuneration. I am not sure that the FSA's responsibilities in respect of prudential supervision flow as far as board directors' remuneration. There is a gap, because the Bill contains powers that the Minister is not prepared to submit to parliamentary scrutiny through the statutory instrument process; he does not know when those powers will be used; there may be other people who can exercise those powers; and, as he said in response to the intervention by the hon. Member for Wolverhampton, South-West (Rob Marris), there are other ways, such as through an injunction, in which the Government could take action against a company that breaches its articles of association. The sanctions are available through a different route if the Government need to take action against the company. I do not think that the Minister has made a persuasive case for the powers to be in the Bill. He would have made a more persuasive case if he had decided that they needed to be subject to parliamentary scrutiny, and on that basis, I urge my colleagues to vote in favour of amendment No. 10. Question put, That the amendment be made:— The House proceeded to a Division.