HL Deb 03 November 1983 vol 444 cc627-8

3.8 p.m.

Baroness Burton of Coventry

My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper.

The Question was as follows:

To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they are satisfied that the existing law is being fully used to counter malpractices in repayment problems reported to the insolvency branch of the Department of Trade; and to what extent action has been taken during the past 12 months.

Lord Lyell

My Lords, appropriate action is taken by the Insolvency Service in respect of all allegations of malpractice reported to it and no particular area is singled out for special attention. Earlier this year the Office of Fair Trading began a wide study of prepayment problems. The findings of that study, when received, will be considered in conjunction with the general review of insolvency law on which a White Paper is expected early next year.

Baroness Burton of Coventry

My Lords, I do not think that the Minister said whether or not the Government were satisfied with the progress being made. I wonder whether he has details of the written reply that was given to me on 27th July, stating that only seven disqualification orders had been made under Section 9 of the Insolvency Act 1976. This supports the view that the existing law is not adequate to deal with the delinquent director problem. Is the Minister aware that this view is held by the National Consumer Council, the Consumers' Association, the Office of Fair Trading and I think by members of the Cork Committee? Are the Government satisfied?

Lord Lyell

My Lords, I always knew that there would be one part of the noble Baroness's main Question that I would not satisfactorily be able to answer. The Government, your Lordships, and, indeed, I are eternally grateful to the noble Baroness for the interest that she shows in these matters; and, above all, for her tremendous work in the very complicated matter of the Cork Report, which I shall forbear from referring to today. Indeed, I have details of the last oral sally that the noble Baroness and I had in your Lordships' House, which was on Bastille Day—14th July. I do not have details of the written reply, which is an error on my part; nor do I have details of Section 9 of 1976 Act. But I stress to the noble Baroness and to your Lordships what I stressed in July this year: the Government are aware of the problems which are raised by the noble Baroness. The Office of Fair Trading is also aware of these special problems in the consumer area. Indeed, the report of the Office of Fair Trading is expected later this year.

Baroness Burton of Coventry

My Lords, I know that the Minister really does wish to help, and I thank him for his remarks—and one day I might get a good answer. However, I wonder whether he would look at the written reply that I received on 27th July to which I referred. Referring to about the last sentence of his original reply to the statement made by the Under-Secretary of State, Mr. Fletcher, about the White Paper being published early in the new year, may I ask the Minister whether I am correct in thinking that he said that that White Paper would be on certain aspects of the Cork Report? If I am correct, could he say what those aspects are?

Lord Lyell

My Lords, I shall certainly examine in detail the written reply which was given by my noble friend. As I do not have it in front of me I am not aware of certain aspects of the Cork Report which will be covered by the White Paper, but I understood that the White paper was to be very comprehensive. If it covers 90 per cent. or 95 per cent. of the matters referred to in the Cork Report—doubtless there will be, or there may be, gaps—I hope that the White Paper will be in its usual comprehensive form.