House of Commons Hansard Debates for 8 Jul 1992

Column 348

Mrs. Bottomley : The subject referred to by the hon. Member for Livingston (Mr. Cook) and by my hon. Friend is of great concern. I did not deal with it properly earlier.

In recent years, there has been a vast expansion in the provision of family planning services by general practitioners. Two out of three women now go to their GPs for family planning advice. However, that development has not been accompanied by a proper review of the appropriate role of family planning clinics. This year, one of the priorities of the NHS has been to review the provision of family planning clinics, and to ensure that they offer choice and a service for young people where that is appropriate. In supporting that work, we shall certainly take advice from Holland about how this worrying problem can be tackled.

Mr. Eddie Loyden (Liverpool, Garston) : Does the Secretary of State agree that the death rate as a result of accidents is intolerably high? Will she bear in mind that certain industries--notably the construction industry--involve a large number of such deaths and that little or nothing is being done to arrest that? Will she ensure that the matter is addressed as part of her strategy?

Mrs. Bottomley : I beg to differ with the hon. Gentleman. The accident record in this country compares favourably with that in other countries. The hon. Gentleman has made an important point, however. Along with the Health and Safety Executive, which has worked closely with us in implementing the strategy, we want to promote the initiate of healthy alliances, especially in the workplace.

Mr. Simon Coombes (Swindon) : If my right hon. Friend's targets are to be realised in future, millions of ordinary people will have to change their life styles dramatically. Does she recognise that the key to that is education, and that an increase in the resources available to the Health Education Authority and health education facilities throughout the country is a necessary prerequisite for the achievement of such targets?

Mrs. Bottomley : I thank my hon. Friend, who has been a great champion of the cause for many years. We work extremely closely with the Health Education Authority, which has been very much involved in our strategy.

The HEA's contribution is important, but so, too, is the role of other health professionals. Following the introduction of the new GP contract, a number of health promotion clinics have been set up. Using the work of GPs in spreading the necessary messages has been extremely effective. We must involve nurses, other health professionals and those in the wider area to ensure that people know and understand the sensible choices that they can make to improve their health.

Mr. Andrew Faulds (Warley, East) : As usual, my question will be brief and pithy. If these stringent voluntary advertising agreements with the tobacco industry are so effective, why is that industry now targeting young women through women's magazines, with the result that the number of young women who smoke is rising? Would not the health and lives of thousands of young women be saved if these voluntary agreements were even more stringent?

Column 349

Mrs. Bottomley : All these matters are subject to continual review. The targets that we have set will be met. There is a particular rise in the target for a reduction in smoking amongst women. We are especially concerned about smoking among pregnant women, and in that regard there will be further initiatives. With regard to relations with the tobacco industry, the hon. Gentleman will be aware that that industry is currently taking legal action against the Government because the packet labels that we have introduced are the most severe.

Mr. Geoffrey Dickens (Littleborough and Saddleworth) : While we welcome the White Paper, the last thing we want is to frighten the nation to death. Can my right hon. Friend confirm that it is perfectly possible to enjoy a good lunch and a glass of wine and still live to a ripe old age? Does she agree that stress and tension, as demonstrated by the Opposition, are just as likely to cause heart disease as over-eating?

Mrs. Bottomley : With reservations, I confirm my hon. Friend's comments. On Saturday I went to a 100th birthday party. The person who had just become 100 years old ate moderately, drank little, had always taken a good deal of exercise and smoked not at all. I think that that indicates that the advice that we are spreading through our document should be followed.

Mr. Bob Cryer (Bradford, South) : Does the Minister accept that her cosy, vapid comments will entirely lack credibility so long as she fails to tackle the real problem of advertising with regard to the cancer-producing substances of tobacco? Could she not start by banning secondary advertising at outside sporting events, mainly through BBC television? There is clear advertising of cigarettes through that medium. The right hon. Lady could then go on to tackle the advertising of booze--alcohol products which cause an enormous amount of ill health in the nation. Or are the Tory Government simply in the pocket of the tobacco manufacturers and the brewers?

Mrs. Bottomley : The Labour party seems to be fixated on one means which it alleges can deliver an end. We are determined to achieve that end. Our aim is that this country should not just be the European Community member with the second greatest fall in tobacco consumption but should build further on that record and do even better by the end of the century. We shall use whatever means can achieve that end. As I have said before, I believe that price is important, that subsidising the growing of tobacco is important, and that advertising is important. In the case of advertising, that is why we have the voluntary agreement, which is constantly subject to renegotiation. Further powers have been taken to tighten control of the sale of cigarettes to under-age children. I take the view that, with regard to smoking, the worst effect on young children is produced by the smoking of parents.

Mr. John Bowis (Battersea) : My right hon. Friend's strategy is very welcome. Can she confirm that built into it is flexibility which will allow for the changing needs in medical science, such as growing awareness of the problems of younger Alzheimer sufferers, and for use of the whole range of medical science, including homeopathic medicine?

Mrs. Bottomley : The strategy is a beginning, not an end. We shall build on the targets. I hope that we shall

Column 350

develop them and broaden them and that new key areas will be introduced. We are working very closely with the director of research and development in the national health service so as to develop better mechanisms to set and achieve targets. I shall certainly bear my hon. Friend's remarks in mind as we carry the strategy forward.

Mr. Jimmy Boyce (Rotherham) : The Secretary of State has said today that she supports a voluntary code for the advertising of tobacco products. She also referred to the fact that the best way to curb tobacco smoking is an increase in price. Will she be kind enough to tell us what level of price increase she is prepared to support?

Mrs. Bottomley : I am not prepared to tolerate any increase in smoking. That is why we have introduced strict targets to reduce smoking even further. There has been a significant fall in this country which, as I have already explained, is greater than in any other country apart from the Netherlands, which happens to take our view on the banning of tobacco advertising. There is concern about particular groups. They are a source of concern to us, of course. We must make sure that we continue to take all possible steps that will effectively achieve that end.

Mr. Anthony Coombs (Wyre Forest) : I warmly welcome this further step in the development of the Government's preventive health policy, which I understand has already been described by the World Health Organisation as a model for other countries. Does my right hon. Friend agree that if we are to increase the targets for reducing coronary heart disease, it is vital to inculcate, particularly in young people, habits of exercise to promote good health? To that extent, will my right hon. Friend liaise with her right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education to ensure that physical education in schools is given much higher priority than it is at present, when all too often only one hour per week is allocated to this very important activity?

Mrs. Bottomley : I shall certainly speak not only to the Secretary of State for Education but also to the Secretary of State for National Heritage. I can confirm what my hon. Friend said about the World Health Organisation. Its director general, Dr. Nakajima, said :

"The health of the nation has international value. I am sure other countries will benefit greatly from the approach England has adopted."

Mr. David Winnick (Walsall, North) : Is the Secretary of State aware that the continued price increases since 1979 for prescription charges, dental treatment and eye testing undermine and erode the whole concept of the national health service? Bearing in mind that fact and the Secretary of State's refusal to take any action over cigarette advertising, less hypocrisy from her on these issues would be welcome.

Mrs. Bottomley : I urge the hon. Gentleman to look at the facts more closely. On prescriptions, when the Labour party was in power, one item in three carried a charge. Only one item in five now carries a charge. Furthermore, life expectancy has increased by three years for men and by two years for women. Perinatal and infant mortality have fallen dramatically. According to a great number of criteria, the nation is healthier now than ever before. Our health strategy is about carrying that forward further and faster.

Column 351

Mr. Jeremy Corbyn (Islington, North) : Is the Secretary of State aware that there is a disturbing increase in asthma and related problems among children, particularly those living in inner- city environments ? Is she prepared to undertake a serious study of the link between asthma in young children in inner-city environments, the increase in pollution caused by traffic, and inadequate housing ? Until now, in response to parliamentary questions from me, she has said that there is no central recording and correlation of these data.

Mrs. Bottomley : The director of research and development has made it clear that better research in the case of asthma is something that we very much want to take forward. There has been a growth in asthma among children. All the factors are not properly appreciated. More work needs to be done. However, I can give the hon. Gentleman a pretty clear undertaking that this will come forward as a key target area at a later date when we have more information.

Mr. Hugh Bayley (York) : I have a simple question for the Secretary of State : to what extent has the Department costed these plans ? Is she aware that the Northern region costed the meeting of a coronary heart disease target in the Green Paper as between £1.6 million and £2.4 million each year until the year 2000 ? There are many other regions, including those in Scotland and Wales. What will be the total cost of the proposals ? Will there be new money, or does the Secretary of State intend to raid existing NHS budgets and force cuts in other areas ? Can she guarantee that there will be new money to fund all the targets ?

Mrs. Bottomley : The purpose of the health service is to deliver high quality services and to achieve health gain. By concentrating on prevention in these areas, we can achieve health gain

cost-effectively. That is our whole strategy for health--the result of our work in reforming the national health service. We spend £100 million a day on the NHS--we have never before put more money into it--and as more money goes in, so priority will be given to the key areas, chosen because through them we can most effectively improve the health of the nation.

Mr. Bryan Davies (Oldham, Central and Royton) : Would not a more appropriate title for the White Paper be, "The Health of Two Nations"? Has not a section of our population been so impoverished by the Government that they cannot afford the high quality diet recommended? Their children are not getting high quality food at school--and often come back to damp and inadequate homes, which reflects the local government cuts enforced by the Government.

Mrs. Bottomley : I do not have sympathy with those remarks. I have made it clear that, for example, one of the most important developments in the general practitioner contract was the introduction of deprivation payments for GPs working in inner cities. Throughout all the key areas that we are considering it is important to ensure that those areas which have not made the same progress as others catch up. That is where health resources are concentrated--the skill, effort and determination necessary to meet the targets and to ensure that we tackle variations wherever possible.

Several Hon. Members rose --

Madam Speaker : Order. We must now move on.

Column 352

Points of Order

4.35 pm

Mr. Keith Vaz (Leicester, East) : As you are aware, Madam Speaker, this morning the Bank of England published its response to the report of the Select Committee on Treasury and Civil Service on banking supervision and the Bank of Credit and Commerce International, dated 4 March. When I sought to obtain a copy of the report from the Library, I was told that none was available. I realise that the Governor of the Bank of England is running around the City like a headless chicken, seeking to defuse the expected criticism in the Bingham report. However, when public bodies respond to a Select Committee report, is it right that they should tell the Press Association before telling hon. Members?

Have you, Madam Speaker, had any intimation from the Chancellor of the Exchequer as to whether he is in a position to make a statement on when the Bingham inquiry report is to be published? There are only five days left before the recess, and hundreds of thousands of people all over the world are waiting for the results of the inquiry.

Mr. Brian Sedgemore (Hackney, South and Shoreditch) : Further to that point of order, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker : Please--Mr. Terence Higgins.

Mr. Terence L. Higgins (Worthing) : It is always inconvenient for the House when an hon. Member receives a written answer that does not appear in Hansard until the following day. For the convenience of the House, perhaps I should therefore mention that an hour or so ago I received a written reply to a question asking when there would be a response from the Bank of England to the report of the Treasury and Civil Service Select Committee. The answer said that the Treasury Minister understood that a response had now been made and a copy placed in the Library. I received a copy earlier today, and I believe that copies are now available in the Library. No doubt, when the Select Committee is reconstituted--I very much hope that it will be next week--it will wish to consider the Bank of England's response. Although the response accepts some of the recommendations, it does not accept them all ; nor, in my view, is it adequate. But--

Madam Speaker : Order. The right hon. Gentleman is getting rather carried away--points of order are for the Chair. His earlier remarks were extremely helpful.

Mr. Higgins : Then I shall say no more, Madam Speaker--other than that the response does not seem to cover the criticisms that have been made and that I therefore hope that there will be a further response at a later stage.

Mr. Sedgemore : Further to that point of order, Madam Speaker. I confirm what the right hon. Member for Worthing (Mr. Higgins) has said. The Library has provided me with a copy of the report. My point of order concerns the actions of the Bank of England in relation to the procedures of the House. Today, the Bank of England has published its response to the fourth report of the Treasury and Civil Service Select Committee on banking supervision and BCCI. On page 12 of The Guardian today there is an article by Alex Brummer and John Willcock headed

Column 353

"BCCI prompts Bank to seek law change".

I have checked the article against the report. It could have been written only by journalists who had the report. At the very least, it is discourteous and deceitful of the Bank of England to give copies of the report to journalists before it is available to hon. Members. I am sure that you, Madam Speaker, know what has happened : before hon. Members get the Bingham report, the Governor has attempted a pre-emptive strike because he knows that his job is on the line. I believe that that is an abuse of the procedures of the House. I hope that you will deprecate the actions of the Governor of the Bank of England.

Several Hon. Members rose --

Madam Speaker : Order. May I deal, first, with the points of order that have been made? In answer to the hon. Member for Leicester, East (Mr. Vaz), I have had no indication that the Chancellor or another Treasury Minister wants to make a statement today. I strongly deprecate the action of the Bank of England, because it shows great discourtesy to the House. As the House knows, I have no influence on the Bank of England, but, as a matter of courtesy, I would expect the House to be informed of a response to a Select Committee report before any other outside body.

Mr. Andrew Welsh (Angus, East) : On a point of order, Madam Speaker. It is reported that the Government have appointed consultants to review the future of water services in a Scotland with a view to privatisation. That would affect everybody in Scotland, yet local authorities and workers in the industry have not been consulted and a statement has not been made on the Floor of the House. There is no Scottish Select Committee and there will be no Scottish Question Time between now and the recess. How can we make the Government answerable without them yet again resorting to the medium of a planted written question to deal with important Scottish matters?

Column 354

Madam Speaker : I understand the hon. Gentleman's frustration. It occurred to me that we have the debate on the summer Adjournment tomorrow and he might like to try his luck in that.

Mr. Terry Rooney (Bradford, North) : On a point of order, Madam Speaker. The European Court ruled this morning that the Shops Act 1950 does not breach European law. In the light of that, and to assist local authorities, is not it time that the Government introduced legislation-- preferably along the lines of the private Member's Bill of my hon. Friend the Member for Ogmore (Mr. Powell)--so that this nonsense of law-breaking up and down the country can be brought to an end?

Madam Speaker : That was a good try, but it is not a matter for the Chair. It is a matter to put to the Government in business questions.

Mr. Paul Flynn (Newport, West) : On a point of order, Madam Speaker. May I raise a matter with you in your capacity as the defender of rights and privileges of Back Benchers? We have no greater privilege than the right to put questions to the Government. For the past six months, I have been raising with the Government a matter of the greatest importance to my constituency. I received five answers last Thursday and a letter last night giving me ambiguous replies. Today, I was told that the Government had been in touch with Directorate-General XIII. I have since telephoned Brussels, which has no trace of any contact with the Government on this important matter. Unless that contact was made today, the answer that I was given was not entirely true. I realise that you, Madam Speaker, are not responsible for these matters, but I ask you to use your great influence to ensure that answers to hon. Members are intelligent and truthful.

Madam Speaker : I am sure that answers to Members are truthful. I do not have the influence that the hon. Member gives me credit for. I understand his frustration, because he has raised the subject on a number of occasions on the Floor of the House. I shall look into it.

Column 355

Transactions with Tax Havens (Sanctions)

4.44 pm

Mr. David Shaw (Dover) : I beg to move,

That leave be given to bring in a Bill to provide sanctions against persons or organisations who engage in financial dealings with tax havens ; to amend the Companies Acts in respect of audits carried out by accountants who maintain offices in tax havens and in respect of the duties of directors of public companies ; to amend the Banking Acts in respect of transactions with banks situated in tax havens ; to regulate the activities of advocates, barristers and solicitors with regard to transactions with tax havens ; and for connected purposes.

Although I am a chartered accountant and I shall mention the accounting profession in my speech, I have no financial interest in tax havens.

The House will be aware that one important aspect of the Maxwell affair is the fact that Mr. Maxwell based his business empire in the tax haven of Liechtenstein. Financial transactions with Liechtenstein are rarely, if ever, for honest purposes. The same is true of many financial transactions with other tax havens.

Recently, we have seen a number of large frauds involving loss to our citizens as a result of transactions involving tax havens. Consequently, I wish to introduce a Bill that would make it unlawful to carry out most types of financial transactions with tax havens. My Bill would provide for sanctions against professional persons--bankers, accountants or lawyers-- who provide advice or assistance with financial transactions involving tax havens.

My Bill would further provide that directors of public companies and of companies managing collective investment schemes such as pension funds and unit trusts shall not enter into transactions with tax havens either personally or through their companies. If my Bill had been law in this country, there would not have been the scandal of the Bank of Credit and Commerce International, in which many United Kingdom citizens lost hundreds of millions of pounds, the scandal of Polly Peck in which hundreds of millions of pounds are still unaccounted for, the scandal of Barlow Clowes or the scandal of Mr. Robert Maxwell stealing so many hundreds of millions of pounds from the pensioners who had worked for his companies.

One point that I should like to make clear to the House is that the problem that tax havens cause is not so much related to the low rates of tax that exist in them ; if that were so, the United Kingdom might be regarded as a tax haven. The main problem caused by tax havens is that they allow transactions to take place in conditions of extreme secrecy, which can be used by fraudsters like Maxwell and the management of BCCI unlawfully to remove many hundreds of millions of pounds from our citizens.

The use of the words "tax havens" is less and less appropriate as they become more and more fraud havens. Indeed, in my draft Bill I have not sought to construct my definition of a tax haven in terms of it being a low -tax area, since that of itself is of little concern. Instead, I have constructed the definition on the fact that a tax haven or fraud haven is a place where money goes missing and where there are no legal arrangements in operation that enable United Kingdom citizens who have been defrauded to obtain information or help that would assist them in the recovery of the money that they have lost.

Many people will ask, "How serious is the problem of tax havens?" I should like to make it clear that the Government have certainly tried to tighten tax law to

Column 356

reduce avoidance and evasion. However, the effectiveness in practice of some of the changes is open to doubt, and in any event the changes in tax law have not dealt with the problem of business and personal fraud.

Although there are no published figures, it is likely that as much as £2 billion a year may be lost in avoided or evaded tax and business or personal fraud through the use of tax havens or fraud havens. One has only to look at the large firms of United Kingdom accountants that maintain associate offices in the tax havens to see how big the business has become.

Although my Bill is mainly concerned with preventing fraud, a tax haven would not be a tax haven if it were not for the reduction in taxation that could be achieved by a person controlling a business from there or creating tax-efficient transactions re-routed through the tax haven. Often, that person gains the benefit of living in or carrying on a business in the United Kingdom but avoids or evades paying tax here by controlling his or her business assets through an offshore trust.

That is just what Robert Maxwell did. He never claimed to own the Daily Mirror ; he claimed only to be its publisher, with ownership controlled by a Liechtenstein trust. That convenient arrangement enabled Maxwell to avoid --some would say evade--about £100 million of capital and other taxes that should have been payable on the profits made by his investment in the Mirror Group.

The loss of tax revenues through tax havens is clearly a serious matter. We could probably reduce income tax by a further 1p in the pound if the Government tightened this area still further. Losses caused by tax havens are by no means limited to the loss of tax revenues. Commercial and personal fraud through tax havens is running at record levels.

In the past 10 years, there have been nine Department of Trade and Industry company investigations which have found extensive details of fraud involving Switzerland and Liechtenstein. Those DTI investigations also detailed the part that other tax havens have played in assisting frauds through the provision of a cloak of secrecy behind which crooks can operate. Consequently, the main purpose of the Bill is to reduce economic loss to the United Kingdom and our people and to discourage white collar crime.

Which are the tax haven countries? According to my definition of a tax haven, the main criterion is that it is a country that assists fraudsters in the taking of other people's money. It is not my intention to penalise a tax haven because it may have a lower rate of tax than the United Kingdom ; my concern is that income and capital gains should not be diverted to a tax haven from the United Kingdom to enable a person who benefits from an association with the United Kingdom to evade or even avoid tax in the United Kingdom. The Bill is directed at the tax havens that assist frauds to take place as well as tax evasion, drug dealing, money laundering and insider dealing. They are crimes that the United Kingdom Government regularly enact legislation to prevent, but all United Kingdom Governments- -Labour and Conservative--have failed to tackle the problem adequately in terms of hitting the white collar criminal where it hurts, which is in his or her bank account. The Government must face the issue because the size of frauds involving tax havens is growing and the number of frauds may also be increasing.

Some areas that are regarded as tax havens, such as Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Man, could easily adapt

Column 357

their systems to avoid being classed as tax havens. All they have to do is accept that where a monetary loss takes place in the United Kingdom, they will co-operate in righting the wrong. Indeed, I believe that some degree of co-operation from those countries has been available in the past.

My main concerns are with Switzerland, Liechtenstein, the Netherlands Antilles and a number of United Kingdom dependent territories in the Caribbean such as the Cayman islands, the British Virgin islands and Panama. The latter countries and United Kingdom-dependent territories are the countries where many of the fraudulent transactions take place. Too many tax havens have traditional relationships with the United Kingdom. That is no excuse for allowing their economies to develop around fraud. Their people will become lazy and their economies will not develop properly. The Foreign Office has a duty to our citizens to review its policies towards those territories and to suggest policies which benefit this nation and its people.

Too many tax avoiders and evaders have been using such tax havens. Too many creative accountants or company directors have been using them ; for example, Mr. Maxwell arranged a number of transactions of such a nature to manipulate the accounts of the Maxwell Communication Corporation. Large international drug dealers are known to use places such as Panama. Share manipulators, a new breed, were found to use tax havens in the Guinness affair, and Goldman Sachs did a large number of share transactions in Maxwell Communication Corporation shares from Liechtenstein trusts in very dubious circumstances. Tax havens have been found to be used by insider dealers in the United States, and a significant one was caught recently. Sadly, no big insider dealers have been caught here. Those caught have tended to be the smaller ones, and one wonders whether that is because the investigations have gone to the door of the tax havens but, because of secrecy laws, have been unable to go any further.

The case for the Bill, or for measures with a similar effect to be introduced by the Government, is overwhelming. How will the Bill operate? In practice, United Kingdom accountants and accounting firms, lawyers and other professionals who have privileges enshrined in law would have sanctions brought against

Column 358

them if they continued to make transactions with tax havens. Accountants carrying out audits and law firms have significant privileges in law. If the privileges are to be sustained, such people and organisations must also have responsibilities to others. Tax havens and transactions with tax havens should be restricted, and sanctions should be used against those who carry out their work in tax havens.

United Kingdom public company directors also have many privileges. They should not own or carry out transactions in a tax haven--

Madam Deputy Speaker (Dame Janet Fookes) : Order. May I invite the hon. Gentleman to wind up?

Mr. Shaw : Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I shall conclude. My Bill would work. I believe that the sanctions, which would be onerous, would be effective because they are necessary to restrict the fraud that has taken place in the companies that I mentioned. The Maxwell fraud and the misery that has been caused to many retired and elderly people make one realise that no measure can be too draconian if it prevents such an evil fraud. I believe that many banks in the City of London would welcome the Bill because it would assist them in preventing and tackding fraud within their own operations. Question put and agreed to.

Bill ordered to be brought in by Mr. David Shaw, Mr. Richard Page, Mr. Stephen Day, Mr. Frank Field, Mr. Keith Vaz, Mr. Tony Banks and Mr. Simon Hughes.

Transactions with Tax Havens (Sanctions)

Mr. David Shaw accordingly presented a Bill to provide sanctions against persons or organisations who engage in financial dealings with tax havens ; to amend the Companies Acts in respect of audits carried out by accountants who maintain offices in tax havens and in respect of the duties of directors of public companies ; to amend the Banking Acts in respect of transactions with banks situated in tax havens ; to regulate the activities of advocates, barristers and solicitors with regard to transactions with tax havens ; and for connected purposes : And the same was read the First time ; and ordered to be read a Second time upon Friday 27 November and to be printed. [Bill 57.]

Column 359

Orders of the Day

Finance Bill

Not amended in the Committee and as amended (in the Standing Committee), further considered.

New Clause 12

Home Income Plans (Investment Bond Schemes)

.--(1) Where a person has sold since 6th April 1986, more than ten investment bond related home income plans to individuals, the provisions of this section shall apply to them.

(2) A person falling within the provisions of this section shall be entitled to a reduction in their tax liability for 1992-93 of the amount specified in subsection (3) below if the condition of subsection (4) below is met.

(3) The reduction in tax liability referred to in subsection (2) above shall be £1.

(4) The condition referred to in subsection (2) above is that no more than 10 per cent of the investment bond related home income plans they have sold since 6th April 1986 have subsequently been terminated.

(5) The Board is empowered by this subsection to issue regulations defining the term "investment bond related home income plans".'. Brought up, and read the First time.--[Mr. Boateng.]

4.56 pm

Mr. Paul Boateng (Brent, South) : I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.

The last time the issue of home income plans was raised on the Floor of the House was in March, during the debate on the Friendly Societies Bill. At that time, I registered my concern, that of my party and, indeed, that of hon. Members of all parties about the thousands of pensioner households which had been inveigled into making investments in wholly unsuitable home income plans. I also said that I had doubts about the effectiveness of the Government's response, which consisted of setting up a committee of regulators to examine problem cases.

We make no apology for bringing the House's attention to the subject again, because we see no evidence--and our postbags reflect this--that the problems have been dealt with adequately. Indeed, there are currently a number of early-day motions which have attracted widespread support from hon. Members of all parties.

The subject, which is of particular concern, has been raised during points of order and in the presentation of the Bill. It is of particular concern because of the warnings that have repeatedly been given, not least by my colleagues, that the Government's deregulation of the financial system has left the unsophisticated saver dangerously unprotected.

The issue should concern all hon. Members. It follows directly on something that the Prime Minister said at the previous Tory party conference. Some Conservative Members will remember that they were there, clapping like agitated penguins at the Prime Minister's words. He said :

"I want to give every family the right to have and to hold their own private corner of life ; their own home, their own savings, their own security for their future."

They are fine words but they are, of course, belied by the number of home repossessions.

Column 360

Home repossessions are especially tragic when they involve the victims of the home income plan scandal, victims who are in the main aged, in retirement and in the autumn of their lives. They find themselves on the verge of being flung out of their homes, and some are being flung out. A number of them have been driven to suicide as a result of their anxiety about the plans and the indebtedness into which they have fallen. Literally hundreds of people have written to me in the past nine months about their plight arising from the home income plans scandal. I know that hon. Members of all parties have received a similar postbag.

I will read to the House some letters that give a sample of the agony and concern that these elderly people face. Mrs. Vera Hawkins of Bromley in Kent writes on behalf of her husband :

"We are another elderly couple who are involved in the Home Investment Plan Scheme which went so distressingly wrong. My husband is 72 and I am 69.

We are desperate because so far nobody has been prepared to stand up and be counted on our behalf.

We understood that we were safely covered by FIMBRA the regulatory body. Can the Government tell us to what use or purpose these bodies exist? They are called Watchdogs.' Who are they watching? Not those devious firms who are their members! Not the clients who obviously so needed this! Did the number of clients increase their cash flow?" Mrs. Hawkins describes writing to the regulatory body and the unsatisfactory answer. She tells of the crippling burden of debt that she and her husband face. She also tells of the plight of other elderly people who have gathered together in support groups for victims. They are doing all they can, even in old age, to fight back.

Mrs. Timperley writes from Northamptonshire. It is often the case that elderly women write because their husbands are too ashamed of the debts into which they have fallen to put pen to paper. Their distress is added to by the fact that they are of a generation for whom any indebtedness is a shame and a disgrace. They are often afraid to go to the local citizens advice bureau or to face their Members of Parliament at their surgeries.

Mrs. Timperley writes :

"I am 73 and my husband is 77. Three years ago we saw an advertisement in a magazine for the over-65s"--

the sharks knew how to target their victims and where to go to attack the vulnerable and ill informed--

"regarding these schemes. We were put in touch with the Portman Building Society and applied for a loan on our bungalow of £10,000 or less. The minimum was £20,000 so we borrowed that amount. After about one and a half years, we repaid £8,000 thinking it would bring the basic mortgage down to £12,000. We received a statement earier this month and to our dismay find that we owe nearly £22,000 and are paying interest on interest. This means that in a few years time we will be homeless and they will have the property for £12,000." Mrs. Timperley describes how she trusted the good faith of the building society and how, as a result of what she describes as sharp practice--an understatement--she is in her present plight. She asks whether something can be done

"for all the elderly people who have been duped in this way and prevent it happening to others?"

Those are just two letters from a postbag that runs into hundreds. The new clause is exploratory. We recognise that the procedural conventions of Finance Bills proscribe any amendment designed to increase revenue. They constrain us from our preferred course, which would be to levy a

Next Section

Home Page