I want to echo the hon. Gentleman’s comments. We see in the Red Book that the changes to various venture capital schemes have been made in response to the new guidelines on state aid that were published last year. Like him, I am rather surprised that the Government have felt the need to make the changes, as it appears from examining those rules that if a robust case has been made and there is evidence to back it, the EU is prepared to grant exemptions.

For example, in paragraph 5.1(a) of the rules there is a safe harbour whereby an investment below €1.5 million is not deemed to be state aid, and if a  member state can produce evidence of a market failure affecting that limit, state aid can be used in connection with stimulating small and medium-sized enterprises. In paragraph 5.1(b) permission is given for Governments to support schemes providing finance to medium-sized companies. Does the Financial Secretary believe that firms employing 50 full-time equivalents are medium sized? I am not sure whether I would see them as medium-sized businesses.

There are other examples in the state aid rules that would create an exemption allowing the Government to continue with venture capital trusts and perhaps set a more generous level. Will the Financial Secretary clarify whether the Commission has given approval to the VCT rules as set out in the Bill? The Red Book is a little opaque as to whether that permission has been received. It would be useful to know whether it has, and to understand more about the case that the Government employed for retaining the status quo prior to the schedule being introduced. The hon. Member for Twickenham also highlighted, appropriately, the contradiction between this schedule and schedule 15—a more generous number of employees is set for R and D tax credits and a tight number for venture capital schemes.

I congratulate the Treasury, for a change, on other changes made in the schedule. On Report of last year’s Finance Bill I discussed an amendment on the 70 per cent. rule, and we also debated inadvertent breaches. I am grateful to see, a year later, that the Minister has listened to my representations and that those changes are in the schedule.