Both of these amendments relate to account opening. As Members of the Committee may be aware from the draft regulations we have published—draft Regulation 13(2)—we intend that, at account opening, a true declaration will be required from the account applicant confirming that they meet the relevant connection-with-the-UK conditions set out in regulations; and that they have not previously opened a saving gateway account, other than an account closed within a cooling-off period offered by the account provider.
Amendment 27 would remove the word "true" from Clause 6(2)(b), so that the account applicant will be required only to make a declaration rather than, as the Bill currently states, "a true declaration". I should explain that the word "true" was included in the Bill to add clarity. I recognise that it might be argued that the use of the word "declaration" implicitly requires that what is declared should be true. However, as this provision is the basis for the imposition of the penalty provided at Clause 19(1) of the Bill, we consider it prudent drafting to put the matter beyond doubt in the Bill.
Clause 6(4), which the noble Baroness’s Amendment 28 would delete, qualifies the requirement at subsection (3) that an approved account provider must open a saving gateway account for any eligible applicant so long as their application is made in accordance with the requirements of the scheme. We believe that there are only very few circumstances in which it would be legitimate for an account provider to refuse to open an account for an eligible person who is prepared to agree to the terms under which the account is offered. We propose to set these limited circumstances out in the regulations. One example relates to credit unions. An unqualified requirement to open accounts for all applicants could present difficulties for credit unions, which, as Members of the Committee may be aware, operate according to a common bond that determines who can become a member. We therefore propose to use subsection (4) to specify in regulations that credit unions will not be required to open accounts for people who are not members or who do not fulfil their membership qualifications. As the Committee may also be aware from the draft regulations, we intend that account providers should not accept an account application when they have reason to believe that a notice of eligibility presented to them is not or may not be genuine, or that a declaration or application made to them contains matters that are or might be untrue. The same applies when any requirements of money-laundering legislation are not satisfied.
The Bill allows for a penalty to be provided in such circumstances. However, the penalty will not be applied when an account provider has taken reasonable steps to comply with the rules. The penalty would not be provided, for example, when an account provider could not reasonably have known from normal account-opening checks that an applicant was not eligible for an account, that a notice of eligibility was not valid, or that a declaration was not true. In view of my explanation, I hope that the noble Baroness will withdraw her amendment.
Saving Gateway Accounts Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Myners
(Labour)
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 c347-8GC Session
2008-09Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand CommitteeSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-22 02:13:42 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_546363
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_546363
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_546363