I, too, support the amendment, albeit for a slightly different reason. I am particularly concerned, as I mentioned at Second Reading, about the issues raised in paragraph (f), which concerns the, ""number of approved account providers"."
When listening to the debate this afternoon about the need to have hard copies of statements every six months, I was doodling some figures. I suspect that when this scheme begins its operation, most people who subscribe to it will not be subscribing £25 per month; they will probably be prescribing, say, £10 per month. In year one, therefore, they will subscribe £120—if they do it every month, which not all of them will—so that the average amount held in the account during the period will be £60. I believe that today LIBOR is 1.5 per cent, so I reckon that the bank will make 90p on such an account. It will have to send out two written statements, which will take up all of, if not more than, the 90p. I am concerned that the scheme will simply not be viable for any account provider. It will be extremely interesting at the end of the first year to have a report that, among other things, will tell us how many account providers there are.
Saving Gateway Accounts Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Newby
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 21 April 2009.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Saving Gateway Accounts Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
709 c365-6GC Session
2008-09Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand CommitteeSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-22 02:01:46 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_548079
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_548079
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_548079