Oral Answers to Questions

David Gauke Excerpts

Tuesday 24th January 2012 Commons Chamber

[Roberta Blackman-Woods (City of Durham) (Lab)]

2. What assessment he has made of the effects on families with children of taxation changes coming into force in 2012-13.

[The Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury (Mr David Gauke)]

The Government have taken unprecedented steps to increase the transparency of decision making, publishing detailed analysis of the impacts of individual measures in tax impact notes and presenting the overall impact of tax benefit reforms at fiscal events. The analysis shows that all but the top decile gain from direct tax changes, and that the Government continue to help protect the most vulnerable.

[Roberta Blackman-Woods]

Research by House of Commons Library and other independent sources shows that, of the £8.1 billion of tax rises and benefit cuts, women are paying £5.8 billion. That is a massive 72%. A further £2.4 billion of cuts will affect families with children. Why are the Government targeting the cuts on women and families? Does not that give the lie to the notion of our all being in this together?

[Mr Gauke]

We do not accept that. I must point out, for example, that of the 1.1 million people taken out of income tax because of policies that the Government have pursued, the majority are women.

[George Freeman (Mid Norfolk) (Con)]

Will the Minister also confirm that, as well as the 1.1 million people taken out of tax, we are reducing the tax bill of 20 million of the poorest families?

[Mr Gauke]

Absolutely. It is important to point out that it is not just those who are taken out of income tax altogether who benefit, but the approximately 25 million people overall who receive an increase in personal allowance. That should be supported by hon. Members of all parties.

[Yvonne Fovargue (Makerfield) (Lab)]

The Treasury has admitted that cutting tax credits will lead to an increase in child poverty. Rather than trying to change the definition of child poverty, was not the Prime Minister right in 2006 when he said:

“We need to think of poverty in relative terms”?

[Mr Gauke]

It is also important not just to think of poverty in terms of moving someone from one side of an arbitrary line based on a percentage of median income to another, but to look more widely. That includes improving poor children’s opportunities. The Government, through the pupil premium and other measures, are concentrating on opening up those opportunities.

[Charlie Elphicke (Dover) (Con)]

Will the Minister tell the House how families can have a greater option of part-time working under the taxation changes, and whether they will have more encouragement to work with the introduction of the benefits cap?

[Mr Gauke]

With the work that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions has undertaken, the Government are determined to ensure that work will always pay and that we do not have people trapped on benefits.

[Cathy Jamieson (Kilmarnock and Loudoun) (Lab/Co-op)]

Yesterday, we heard the Prime Minister say that jobs in retail are a vital part of the economy. Why are the Government making changes to working tax credits that will hit part-time workers in the retail sector hard? Is that a fair deal for parents who are trying to do the right thing? Can the Minister tell us how many couples who work between 16 and 24 hours a week will lose out, and by how much?

[Mr Gauke]

We are taking measures to ensure that work will always pay. On the Labour party’s complaints, I point out that its flagship policy at the last election to increase national insurance contributions for employers would have hit the retail and other sectors very hard.

[Mr Mike Weir (Angus) (SNP)]

3. What recent discussions he has had with Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs on the operation of the COP26 process.

[The Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury (Mr David Gauke)]

Ministers have regular meetings to oversee and challenge HMRC business, including the administration of tax credits and the recovery of overpayments.

[Mr Weir]

I am grateful for the Minister’s answer, but does he understand the intense frustration and anger of many of my constituents who repeatedly tell HMRC about errors in tax credits that HMRC does not correct, which subsequently give rise to overpayments? How often can HMRC be allowed to make mistakes and hide behind COP26 to evade any responsibility?

[Mr Gauke]

I understand the hon. Gentleman’s concern—he has raised this matter on behalf of his constituents a number of times. The Treasury and HMRC are always seeking to improve the system. It is in a better place than it was four or five years ago, but none the less, there are still issues. I constantly tell HMRC that we need to find ways to address problems when information is provided but not taken up and used.

[John Howell (Henley) (Con)]

4. What progress he has made on implementation of the national infrastructure plan 2011.

--- Later in debate ---

[Andrew Jones (Harrogate and Knaresborough) (Con)]

T3. I warmly welcome the work being done by the Office of Tax Simplification, but does the Exchequer Secretary agree that we can do more to boost tax transparency, for example by providing all taxpayers with an annual statement on how their hard-earned tax pounds are spent?

[The Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury (Mr David Gauke)]

My hon. Friend raises an interesting point. In November, the Government and Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs published a consultation paper on exactly those lines, and I very much look forward to the ten-minute rule Bill that my hon. Friend the Member for Ipswich (Ben Gummer) will introduce tomorrow, which makes that proposal. We should all agree that we should do everything that we can to make tax and spending as transparent to the public as possible.

[Kerry McCarthy (Bristol East) (Lab)]

T8. The Public Accounts Committee has“serious concerns that large companies are treated more favourably than other taxpayers”by HMRC.That once again gives the lie to the Government’s claims that we are all in this together. What action will the Chancellor or the Minister take to ensure greater transparency and accountability in HMRC, and to assure ordinary taxpayers who are struggling to pay their bills this month that companies will also pay their full share?

[Mr Gauke]

The Government will respond in detail to the PAC report shortly, but it is only fair to point out that, in recent years, HMRC’s yield from large companies has increased substantially. Indeed, we have provided, as part of the spending review settlement for HMRC, additional resources to get more out of large businesses, so that we ensure that they pay their fair share.

[John Glen (Salisbury) (Con)]

T4. How much revenue does the Treasury expect HMRC to receive as a result of recent measures to reduce tax avoidance, and how much does the Minister estimate could be accrued from tax exiles who make £100 million in this country, clear off to Switzerland for five years, and then come back and advise the Leader of the Opposition?

[Mr Gauke]

As a consequence of the measures that we announced last year to tackle avoidance, we believe that something like £1 billion will be raised, £750 million of that relating to disguised remuneration, a policy that was opposed by Labour. I cannot talk about individual advisers to the leader of the Labour party and their tax affairs, but if such a person is advising the Labour leader, as far as we are concerned he is doing a great job and should carry on.

[Jonathan Ashworth (Leicester South) (Lab)]

Can the Chief Secretary confirm, so that we are clear, that the Chancellor is set to borrow more and debt is set to be larger than it would have been, had the Government followed the path of my right hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh South West (Mr Darling)?

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Adrian Bailey (West Bromwich West) (Lab/Co-op)]

The Government’s national insurance holiday for new companies to employ new workers has been acknowledged by the Prime Minister to be a flop. So far just £6 million has been spent on supporting jobs and £12 million in administering them, out of a budget of £1 billion. Will the Minister consider taking the advice of the Federation of Small Businesses and extending that support to all small businesses prepared to take on new staff?

[Mr Gauke]

The take-up has indeed been disappointing, but there have been 12,000 successful applications and we estimate that about 40,000 jobs have been supported in total. There are 17 participating businesses in the hon. Gentleman’s constituency. If I may correct him on one thing, the administration costs are not £12 million, but £325,000. As for extending the scheme further, we have to bear in mind the cost. We are concerned about that, even if the Opposition are not.

[Sir Alan Beith (Berwick-upon-Tweed) (LD)]

T9. I thank the Chief Secretary to the Treasury for his help in securing the extension of the north-east enterprise zone into Northumberland, which could bring jobs to my constituents in south-east Northumberland. Will enhanced capital allowances be available within the extended area?

Anti-avoidance

David Gauke Excerpts

Thursday 12th January 2012 Written Statements

[The Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury (Mr David Gauke)]

The Government are committed to tackling tax avoidance to ensure the Exchequer is protected and fairness is maintained for the taxpayer.

HMRC has recently become aware of a contrived and aggressive avoidance scheme that seeks to generate post-cessation trade relief for set-off by users of the scheme against their other income or capital gains. This scheme relies on arrangements that have a tax avoidance purpose. The Government do not accept that these arrangements have the effect that is sought, but to remove any doubt, and to prevent scheme providers continuing to devise and operate even more contrived schemes, prompt and decisive action is being taken to protect the Exchequer.

I am today announcing that legislation will be introduced in Finance Bill 2012 to prevent post-cessation trade relief being given where a qualifying payment or qualifying event arises from arrangements entered into in which the main purpose, or one of the main purposes, is to obtain a tax reduction. The legislation will have effect from today and will protect significant amounts of revenue.

We have acted quickly to prevent the use of this particular scheme and we will not hesitate to close down other schemes representing a significant risk to the Exchequer as we become aware of them.

Draft legislation and further details of this measure are being published on HMRC’s website today.

Finance Bill

David Gauke Excerpts

Tuesday 10th January 2012 Written Statements

[The Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury (Mr David Gauke)]

The Finance Bill will be published on Thursday 29 March.

Explanatory notes on the Bill will be available in the Vote Office and the Printed Paper Office and placed in the Libraries of both Houses on that day. Copies of the explanatory notes will be available on the Treasury’s website.

NICs Holiday Factsheet

David Gauke Excerpts

Thursday 15th December 2011 Written Statements

[The Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury (Mr David Gauke)]

In line with my commitment during the passage of the National Insurance Contributions Act 2011, I am today placing in the Libraries of both Houses a report on the functioning of the NICs holiday scheme.

The report provides information on: the number of applications received, the number of businesses benefiting in 2010-11, the amount by which they benefited and the number of jobs supported through the NICs holiday. The information is presented by region and constituency where possible. To date, just over 10,000 applications have been made for the scheme.

The holiday was announced in the June 2010 Budget and is designed to encourage the creation of private sector jobs in regions reliant on public sector employment by reducing the cost to new business of employing staff. The holiday exempts qualifying new businesses in eligible regions from up to £5,000 of employer national insurance contributions for each of the first 10 employees hired in the first 12 months of business. This is part of a wider set of policies designed to help businesses and stimulate growth in the regions.

Anti-avoidance Regulations

David Gauke Excerpts

Tuesday 6th December 2011 Written Statements

[The Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury (Mr David Gauke)]

The Government are determined to reduce tax avoidance in order to protect the Exchequer, which provides funding for public services, and maintain fairness for the taxpayer.

Accordingly, the Government are announcing today that regulations have been laid to clarify the time at which companies with foreign currency loan relationships or derivative contracts and matched foreign currency shares, ships or aircraft come within the provisions of the Loan Relationships and Derivative Contracts (Disregard and Bringing into Account of Profits and Losses) Regulations 2004 (the disregard regulations).

These regulations put beyond doubt that companies can only defer foreign exchange gains and losses under the disregard regulations from the date that they have a foreign currency loan relationship or derivative contract which is matched with shares, ships or aircraft. The regulations will apply to shares, ships or aircraft which are matched on or after 6 December 2011.

The clarification follows disclosure of an avoidance scheme in which companies claim to permanently defer foreign exchange gains on foreign currency loan relationships and derivative contracts by retrospectively designating the loan relationship as a hedge of newly acquired foreign currency share capital. The regulations will prevent future avoidance in this area and protect significant amounts of revenue.

Further details have today been published on HMRC’s website, together with the regulations, technical note and tax information and impact note.

Draft Legislation for Finance Bill 2012 and Tax Policy Update

David Gauke Excerpts

Tuesday 6th December 2011 Written Statements

[The Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury (Mr David Gauke)]

Following Budget 2011, the Government consulted on a number of tax policies. Today the Government are publishing the responses to these consultations alongside draft clauses for legislation to be included in Finance Bill 2012. This fulfils our objective to confirm the majority of intended tax changes at least three months ahead of publication.

The draft clauses will be open to technical consultation until 10 February 2012.

Details of the clauses published today are set out in the overview of draft legislation document, which also includes tax information and impact notes for each measure. All publications will be available on the HMT and HMRC websites.

The Government are making additional changes to tax policy. Legislation will be introduced in the Finance Bill 2012 to:

provide that visiting EU forces and their civilian staff receive the tax treatment to which they are entitled under the EU status of forces agreement. Similar treatment already applies to visiting North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) forces.

exempt from income tax payments of the continuity of education allowance to service personnel in the armed forces.

ensure that individuals provided with security enhanced cars are not unfairly impacted by the abolition of the £80,000 cap on the cash equivalent of the benefit on company cars.

exempt from UK taxation, money earned by non-resident footballers and team officials in relation to the Champions League final in 2013, which will be held at Wembley.

ensure that existing tax rules dealing with tax adjustments arising on a change in accounting policy continue to apply following the expected changes to UK generally accepted accounting practice in 2012. The legislation will apply to changes in accounting policy where accounts are prepared after 1 January 2012.

introduce a lower rate of 20% of the full rates of climate change levy for supplies of taxable commodities used in the recycling of steel and aluminium, from 1 April 2012.

make consequential amendments to stamp duty land tax reliefs arising from provisions of the Health and Social Care Bill.

make further changes to the capital allowances anti-avoidance rules that apply to transactions involving plant or machinery following the announcement on 12 August 2011 to close down a loophole in the legislation.

take a power to modify the stamp duty land tax disclosure of tax avoidance schemes regime to facilitate both the removal of the grandfathering rules for certain avoidance schemes using the sub-sale rules and the removal of the property valuation thresholds for disclosure.

provide double taxation relief for remote gaming duty, general betting duty and pool betting duty following the announcement on 18 July 2011 of a review of remote gambling taxation.

amend the bank levy to ensure that the liabilities of joint ventures are correctly aggregated into a foreign banking group or a relevant non banking group’s chargeable equity and liabilities; to ensure that double taxation relief can be restricted where the amount of a foreign bank levy subsequently is reduced; and to amend the powers allowing the rules for the exchange of information with foreign authorities to work as intended. The changes to the rules on joint ventures will have effect for chargeable periods ending on or after 1 January 2012.

The Government will propose amendments in Finance Bill 2013 to two pieces of legislation designed to protect the UK tax base. These are contained in sections 714 to 751 of the Income Tax Act 2007 (transfer of assets abroad) and section 13 of the Taxation of Chargeable Gains Act 1992 (gains on assets held by foreign companies closely controlled by UK participators). A further announcement will be made around Budget 2012 and the Government intend to publish a consultation including draft legislation at that time.

The Government also announce the withdrawal of five extra statutory concessions and a consultation on supplementary legislation for two concessions. The withdrawals will have effect from the beginning of the 2013-14 tax year. Further details are available on the HMRC website.

The Government have also tabled two further written statements today which:

set out legislation for Finance Bill 2012 which has effect from today; and

provide further details on non-domicile taxation and the statutory residence test.

Draft Legislation for Finance Bill 2012: Measures with Immediate Effect

David Gauke Excerpts

Tuesday 6th December 2011 Written Statements

[The Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury (Mr David Gauke)]

This Government are committed to creating a fair tax system and will take the necessary steps to prevent the loss of tax revenues.

The Government are announcing today measures which will protect the Exchequer and maintain fairness in the tax system. The legislation for these measures will have effect from today and will be included in Finance Bill 2012.

The protocol on announcements made outside scheduled fiscal events, published at Budget 2011, sets out the criteria the Government will observe when changing legislation with immediate effect. The Government are acting in accordance with the protocol in announcing the following changes to legislation.

Lloyd’s stop-loss insurance

Legislation will be introduced to ensure that all premiums payable by corporate members of Lloyd’s in respect of member-level stop-loss reinsurance shall be deducted for tax purposes in the same period in which the profits to which they relate are recognised. The legislation will apply to all premiums paid in respect of policies taken out on or after 6 December 2011 to remove the benefit of the current mismatch without further delay.

Scope of the supplementary charge

The Government are introducing legislation, taking effect from 6 December 2011, to prevent a potential loss of tax by ensuring that the supplementary charge applies to ring-fence chargeable gains and to confirm that the scope of the supplementary charge matches that of ring-fence corporation tax.

Section 171a of the Taxation of Chargeable Gains Act 1992 will be amended to provide that an election cannot be made to transfer a ring fence chargeable gain from a company carrying on a ring fence trade to a company not carrying on a ring fence trade.

Section 330 of the Corporation Tax Act 2010 will be amended to put beyond doubt that supplementary charge is charged by reference to all of the ring fence profits of a company that are chargeable to corporation tax; that is by reference to its chargeable gains in addition to the trading profits arising to the company as a result of its ring fence trade.

Further details have today been published on HMRC’s website, together with the proposed draft legislation and tax information and impact notes.

The Government have also tabled two further written statements today which:

set out legislation for Finance Bill 2012 and updates on tax policy; and

provide further details on non-domicile taxation and the statutory residence test.

Non-Domicile Taxation and Statutory Residence Test

David Gauke Excerpts

Tuesday 6th December 2011 Written Statements

[The Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury (Mr David Gauke)]

At Budget 2011, the Government announced a package of reforms to the taxation of non-domiciled individuals and their intention to introduce a statutory definition of tax residence.

Following consultation, the core reforms to non-domicile taxation will be included in Finance Bill 2012 as announced and draft legislation is published today. This comprises the introduction of a higher £50,000 annual charge, a new relief to encourage business investment and technical simplifications to some aspects of the existing non-domicile rules.



The legislation of Statement of Practice 1/09, which is one of the simplifications to the existing non-domicile rules, will be taken forward in Finance Bill 2013 to take effect from April 2013.

The consultation on tax residence raised a number of detailed issues which will require careful consideration to ensure the legislation achieves its important aim of providing certainty for individuals and businesses. The Government will therefore legislate the statutory residence test in Finance Bill 2013 to take effect from April 2013 rather than April 2012. It will introduce any reforms to ordinary residence at the same time. This will give time to consult thoroughly on the detail of these changes well in advance of implementation.

The Government are committed to the form of the statutory residence test outlined in consultation. They will make a further announcement around Budget 2012 when it will publish their response to the recent consultation together with a further consultation on policy detail and draft legislation.

This will ensure that the full package of measures announced at Budget 2011 will be implemented in a two-step programme that will be completed in Finance Bill 2013. The Government remain committed to making no further substantive changes to these rules for the remainder of this Parliament.

The Government have also tabled two further written statements today which:

set out legislation for Finance Bill 2012 and updates on tax policy; and

set out legislation for Finance Bill 2012 which has effect from today.

Tax Avoidance

David Gauke Excerpts

Monday 21st November 2011 Written Statements

[The Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury (Mr David Gauke)]

The Government are fully committed to tackling tax avoidance and will take necessary steps to protect the Exchequer and maintain fairness in the tax system.

The Government published “Tackling Tax Avoidance” at Budget 2011 which outlines a more strategic approach to addressing avoidance by placing the emphasis on preventing avoidance before it occurs. By building in sustainable defences to avoidance we will reduce the need for immediate changes to legislation once an avoidance risk has arisen, or for HMRC to challenge avoidance once it has happened.

In December 2010, I asked Graham Aaronson QC to lead a study that would consider whether a general anti-avoidance rule (GAAR) could deter and counter tax avoidance, while providing certainty, retaining a tax regime that is attractive to businesses, and minimising costs for businesses and HMRC.

I have now received Mr Aaronson’s report and have arranged for it to be published today on HM Treasury’s website at:

http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/d/gaar_final_report_111111.PDF.

Mr Aaronson has recommended a narrowly focused GAAR which should initially apply to the main direct taxes—income tax, capital gains tax, corporation tax, and petroleum revenue tax, as well as national insurance contributions. The report sets out in detail how a GAAR could be introduced, and includes an illustrative draft rule. It also includes a summary of the views of representative bodies in the tax sector.

The Government will consider the report in detail and the extent to which the proposals could add to HMRC’s existing legislative and administrative approaches and further reduce levels of tax avoidance. The Government will discuss the implications of the proposed rule with business and tax groups and respond fully at Budget 2012, setting out their plans for further, formal public consultation, if appropriate.

I will place a copy of the report in the Library of the House.

Bank Account Fraud

David Gauke Excerpts

Tuesday 15th November 2011 Westminster Hall

[The Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury (Mr David Gauke)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Gale. I congratulate the right hon. Member for East Ham (Stephen Timms) on securing the debate.

I sympathise with the right hon. Gentleman’s constituents, whose experiences he described so vividly. He knows that it is difficult for the Government to comment on specific cases, but it is clearly unacceptable that individuals who have been victims of fraud—that seems to be the case that he set out—should be systematically denied access to a bank account. As far as I am aware, there is no legal or regulatory reason for this to happen.

As the right hon. Gentleman said, the consequences in this day and age of someone being denied a bank account are considerable, and I entirely agree with him that that should not lightly or accidentally be denied. It is worth making the wider point that the Government want to ensure that we improve levels of financial inclusion, as indeed did the Government in which he served with such distinction. We believe that banks should serve the economy, and we are committed to improving access to banking and the transparency of financial products for consumers.

Having access to appropriate banking services is an important element of modern life, and it can help to alleviate some of the problems faced by low-income families. A bank account enables individuals to make and receive payments through a variety of channels, have a more secure place to keep money and reduce the cost of household bills. The number of individuals without bank accounts has fallen in recent years, but the Government remain keen to see the situation improve further, and in particular to identify groups who may have specific difficulties in accessing a bank account.

While the situations described by the right hon. Gentleman are clearly invidious, it is not clear how many individuals are affected by this sort of difficulty. This is the first time that I have personally been made aware of this issue. As far as the Treasury is aware, it is not widespread. The right hon. Gentleman may have identified a growing problem that we need to look at. His industry and dedication as a constituency MP have highlighted not one but two cases that happen to have occurred among his constituents.

The issue falls within the remit of the Financial Secretary to the Treasury. He is not available to attend the debate, but he will be asking officials to investigate how this matter may have arisen and how many consumers may be affected. We will write to the right hon. Gentleman to explain the findings, and I am grateful to him for highlighting this particular issue. Clearly, we need to understand whether the problem is widespread.

The right hon. Gentleman set out four points, and I shall try to respond as best I can. I will take his first and third points together. He asked whether individuals should be informed if they are going to be denied a bank account and, if so, whether they should be provided with a reason. Those are eminently sensible and reasonable points. Consumers have the right to ask for a reason if they are denied a bank account, as set out in the Money Advice Service’s guide to bank accounts, which is available on its website. Consumers may also complain to the specific firm if they are unhappy with the outcome, and they can take their complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service.

The decision to offer a bank account is ultimately a commercial decision. Current account providers are not obliged to provide a specific reason for not offering an account. However, it is worth highlighting the Financial Services Authority’s principle that financial institutions are required to treat their customers fairly, which is relevant in these circumstances.

The right hon. Gentleman questioned whether consumers should be denied a bank account where there has been no allegation of wrongdoing. Again, decisions as to whether to offer a bank account are a commercial matter for the financial institution concerned, and the Government do not intervene in such decisions. However, there is no legal or regulatory reason for victims of fraud to be denied a bank account. The circumstances that he set out appear to be of some concern.

The fourth question asked by the right hon. Gentleman was whether consumers should be given the opportunity to challenge the refusal of an account. If consumers are unhappy with the decision taken, they may complain to the specific firm concerned, and if they are unhappy with the outcome, they can take their complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service. I reiterate the point that if a financial institution, or more specifically a bank, has been in breach of the FSA principle of treating customers fairly, the individual customer can raise that with the bank and with the Financial Ombudsman Service. If the explanation that is given to a customer is wrong—for example, if there is misleading information about how CIFAS works and its impacts—without wanting to be drawn too much into specific cases, it seems there is a case that the customer is not being treated fairly.

[Stephen Timms]

Part of the difficulty arose when the banks to which an application was made simply said to Miss Dolor, “You do not meet the criteria for an account.” I do not know whether that meets the terms of providing an explanation, but it clearly did not shed any light on the matter for her. If she had been told that she had been registered in such and such a way with CIFAS, she would have understood what was happening. The whole process was opaque. Does the Minister agree that some effort should be made to provide some illuminating information rather than a kind of stonewall response? It might meet the letter of the requirement, but in practice it does not help the customer at all.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Gauke]

I have considerable sympathy with the point that the right hon. Gentleman makes. Again, I do not want to be drawn into an individual case, but clearly it is not terribly helpful when the response may be technically accurate, but does not get to the heart of the matter. As he has set out, the individual customer, a member of the public, will be concerned if they find themselves in that most difficult of situations where they are being denied a bank account, but without any real understanding as to why. As in the cases that he has highlighted, an individual may go from bank to bank without being given any real indication as to why they are in that difficult position. In such circumstances, I sympathise with him and his constituents.

The Government want to ensure that everyone can access the financial services that they need to play a full part in society. I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for raising this issue in today’s debate. I assure him that we will consider the matter and investigate whether it is widespread. I want to assure him that it will be taken into account as part of the Government’s ongoing work to improve financial inclusion and access to bank accounts. He has rightly set out some of the difficulties that exist for individuals if they are not able to access a bank account. If the attempt to tackle fraud is working in such a way that the innocent are being punished, we need to address that by working with the FSA and the high street banks.

I reiterate my thanks to the right hon. Gentleman for raising the matter. My colleague, the Financial Secretary, will reply to him with further details after we have had an opportunity further to investigate the extent of the problem. If there is anything that we can do to address this matter, we are certainly keen to do so.