Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Lea of Crondall (Labour) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 12 December 2006. It occurred during Ministerial statement on Pensions: Personal Accounts.


Pensions: Personal Accounts

My Lords, I welcome the Statement as the culmination of a most intricate process, led initially by Adair Turner, and the diplomacy of Her Majesty’s Government in talking to all the parties concerned. I have to point out to the noble Lords, Lord Skelmersdale and Lord Oakeshott, that a wide area of industry and commerce, including the CBI and the TUC, has welcomed this approach. I regret the rather carping tone towards what has been a consensus development and the idea that somehow the insurance companies are miffed. That shows a lack of statesmanship on their part. I turn to a question that was hinted at, if not stated, by the noble Lord, Lord Skelmersdale, concerning the term ““opt-out””. As I understand it, there is no opt-out, in that sense, in the White Paper. Of course there would be considerable worries on the part of workers, many millions of whom rely on the automaticity of enrolment, if there were a bribe along the lines of what applies, for example, to the working time directive: ““If you work here, you are expected to opt out””. I am looking for an assurance from my noble friend that that philosophy is not contained in the White Paper and that there are safeguards to ensure that employers will not be able to put unfair pressure on employees to give up their new rights.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
687 c1487 
Session
2006-07
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Contributions Workplace pensions Pension rights National employment savings trust scheme
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk