There is a proposal that section 32 be deleted from the Bill. Is that agreed?
SECTION 32.
Amendment No. 110 not moved.
We need an explanation.
I propose to delete this section. The European Directives exempt from their scope credit provided without charge. Having considered the matter in the light of consultations which followed the publication of the Bill I consider that the provisions of this section which are similar to those relating to credit agreements generally are overly onerous on a person who provides credit without charge. They could conceivably affect every casual credit or loan account making their provisions subject to the provisions of the Bill. As a result every convenient arrangement whereby a trader provides credit to a consumer whether by invoice or running account — for instance, the pint on a slate in the local pub or the pound of butter in the corner shop — by becoming liable to the provisions of the section would require a credit agreement signed by all the parties. Having considered the matter we decided that credit to which charges apply is amply catered for by section 31. I brought forward the proposals contained in amendment No. 38 to exempt from the scope of the Bill credit provided without charge and I now propose to delete section 32. Those are the reasons for my proposal to delete the section.
It appears to be a follow-on from the exemptions in the previous section.
That is correct. The absurdity of it was the telling factor in the end.
Section 32 deleted.