Proceeding contribution from George Howarth (Labour) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 26 February 2008. It occurred during Adjournment debate on Marconi Pension Fund.
Marconi Pension Fund
It is significant that my hon. Friends the Members for Chorley (Mr. Hoyle), for Knowsley, South (Mr. O'Hara) and for Coventry, South (Mr. Cunningham) are here, because we all have large numbers of Marconi pensioners among our constituents. I know that my hon. Friend the Member for Chorley has some current employees of the company among his, and I think that that is also the case for my hon. Friend the Member for Coventry, South. This issue is vital to a number of areas right across the country. I want to conclude by putting some questions to my hon. and learned Friend the Minister. First, will he commit to a review of the regulatory regime governing schemes such as that of Pension Corporation? If so, will he take into account the following issues, which I believe should be covered by such a review? The first issue is governance—that is, protecting the role of trustees, including member-nominated trustees, and ensuring that they have clear information and are involved early on and at every step in the process. It is essential that trustees are in a position to ask difficult questions and to get good advice. Any such review also needs to take into account transparency. It goes without saying that without transparency there is no way that pension holders and those paying into a pension fund can know whether their investment is being properly managed. There is also the issue of risks and protections for members' benefits—an enormous concern in undertakings of this kind, which are unproven and untested. Being positive, such undertakings could be called innovative, but there are also a number of risks involved and in those circumstances the protections against those risks are hugely important. There is the issue of breaking the link between the employer and the pension scheme of their employees. Again, that is a large step to take and one that I believe should be considered by such a review of the regulatory regime. Of course, there are the potential regulatory gaps. It is important that those gaps are properly reviewed and it is also important that, where such gaps exist, they are closed, so that pensions are much better protected. Finally, specifically on Marconi, will my hon. and learned Friend put pressure on the pensions regulator to extend the remit of the independent trustees imposed on Pension Corporation, whose term is due to expire in April? That would maintain the protection available to pension holders, which the regulator saw as absolutely necessary as recently as last November. This is an enormously important issue for those whose pensions will be affected by such schemes. I know that my hon. and learned Friend has concerns and that he took careful note of the issues that were raised in this regard when the Pensions Bill was considered in Committee. I hope that he can give us some reassurance that our fears will be dealt with adequately within the relevant regulatory arrangements.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 472 c227-8WH
- Session
- 2007-08
- Chamber / Committee
- Westminster Hall
- Subjects
- Workplace pensions Pension funds Marconi
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-16 02:47:16 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_449306
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_449306
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_449306