One of the most frustrating things in a Bill like this, which is one long order-making power, is the unwillingness of the Government to put in the Bill even the bare minimum of what how long a scheme should run. The Minister says that he would like flexibility, and I say it should not be for under a year. I cannot believe that there could be any difference of opinion about that, and yet the Government still want a degree of flexibility that would allow them to create a saving gateway account which would not represent savings at all; it would just be a sort of current account that gave you a bonus after a couple of months. I do not think that we should legislate for something like that.
The Government are taking flexibility to an undue degree. It is flexibility that they should not need, because they should be prepared to sign up to a bare minimum of what a saving scheme looks like. I shall consider what the Minister has said before Report, but what he has said today is unsatisfactory. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment 21 withdrawn.
Saving Gateway Accounts Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Noakes
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Thursday, 2 April 2009.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Saving Gateway Accounts Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
709 c334GC Session
2008-09Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand CommitteeSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-22 01:44:29 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_546322
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_546322
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_546322