Parliamentary Search

Proceeding contribution from Lord McKenzie of Luton (Labour) in the House of Lords on Monday, 11 June 2007. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Pensions Bill.

Pensions Bill

I thank the noble Baroness for moving the amendment. When I read the original wording and then the amendment, I warmed to ““misconduct”” rather than ““misbehaviour””—in the drafting sense, I hasten to add. Being unfit for office by reason of misconduct is already covered in paragraph 3(5)(g), but I agree that the phrase, "““has been guilty of misbehaviour””," is a little odd. An unnamed official did say that ““misbehaviour”” sounded rather good fun, or could encompass that. I will take this away and reconsider it.

Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
692 c1512 
Session
2006-07
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Disclosure of information Data protection Costs Annuities Allowances Civil service Advisory services Conflict of interests Women Equality Finance Families Freedom of information ICT Information Discrimination Misconduct Private sector NHS Low incomes Northern Ireland Pay Public appointments Workplace pensions Pensions Public sector Public participation Standards Teachers Small businesses Tax allowances Pensions Commission Gender impact assessment Personal Accounts Delivery Authority Pensions Advisory Service National employment savings trust scheme
Legislation
Pensions Bill 2006-07
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk