Clause 6
5:00 pm
Ian Pearson (Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Economic and Business), Department for Business, Enterprise & Regulatory Reform; Dudley South, Labour)
In short, we need to have further discussions with the banks and other providers on this issue. With regard to amendment 38, it is difficult to see what a general requirement that account providers
“may not unreasonably refuse to open an account for an eligible person”
could add to the approach that we are adopting. It raises questions about whether a refusal to open an account was unreasonable and what criteria should be used in reaching that decision, so it would create uncertainty.
We believe that the approach that we have set out will provide an easily understood and workable set of rules for account providers. The hon. Gentleman will find that they have been closely modelled on the child trust fund regulations. We will, however, want to keep the rules under review and they would potentially need to be updated by the Government without primary legislation, which is why the amendment is not acceptable. In the run-up to the scheme launch, it will be important for us to continue to work closely with providers and advice-giving bodies to balance the requirement that opening an account should not be an obstacle to savers with the need for account providers to carry out normal account-opening checks on the identity of the applicant and to receive the assurances that they rightly expect.
This issue will be the subject of further discussion. If any changes are needed to the draft regulations, we will consider them at a later date. As hon. Members will be aware, the draft regulations are subject to the affirmative procedure. I hope that the hon. Member for Henley will accept that it would not be appropriate to put the proposed provision in the Bill and that he will seek leave to withdraw the amendment.