Skip to main content

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

If my officials have a detailed answer to that before I sit down, I am sure that a note will wend its way to me from the Box. If it does not arrive by the time our discussion on this amendment concludes, I will write to the noble Baroness. I think that it will be covered in our response to the consultation document, but to the extent that it is not, I will ensure that she receives a full reply. I do not have the specific information that she seeks. We do not believe that personal accounts will represent unfair competition to other savings products, because it will be designed as a basic, defined-contribution pension scheme, with limited investment choice and no added insurance features. Further, the restriction on transfers and a limit on contributions will target the scheme appropriately and allow scope for the rest of the pensions market. More widely, pre-existing pensions products should also benefit from the introduction of automatic enrolment and minimum employer contributions. We intend that the personal accounts scheme be self-financing in the long term through money recovered from membership charges. However, there will be a need to provide for the set-up in the short term. I am sorry to sound like a gramophone record, but financing further forward will be a matter for the detail of the second pensions Bill. My honourable friend James Purnell has made it clear that initially the funding of the authority will be grant in aid. We will discuss the extent to which any of that initial phase becomes rechargeable, depending on whether it is for the cost of the initial advice or for setting up and implementing the scheme, as part of the second Bill. On the point made by the noble Baroness, I can now say that the ABI’s analysis has been taken into account in our deliberations. We have also received analysis from the NAPF and Which? What that led us to conclude will, I hope, be apparent very soon.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
692 c1542 
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