Mr. Stephen Mason:

As can be seen from the figures, we veto a very small number. We have voted against 18 cases. There have been 243 cases voted on and we have voted against 18 cases, which involve secure credit, for a variety of reasons. We have given the full detail on the 18 cases.

To summarise, which is what the Deputy asked for, it would largely be because the arrangement would not have returned the customer to solvency. In many cases it was that the proposal was not for what was allowed for under the Act, which was a six-year arrangement, but was for a shorter arrangement for something like a year, when the customer had clear repayment capacity to pay some of his or her debts over a six-year period.

In a couple of cases, there were assets outside of the jurisdiction, holiday homes and so on, which it was decided not to include in the personal insolvency arrangement. On that basis, we did not vote for it.