---

Pensions Bill

It should be a matter for the trustees of the pension scheme to examine the various options that they wish to make available to its members. As Paul Myners, the chairman of PADA, quite clearly said in his evidence to the Committee, each additional whistle that is attached to the scheme will have a cost for the members. Keeping it simple is the key to effective delivery of personal accounts. If we do not do that, and if we do not create a scheme that people can know all about without having to make a detailed examination of the principles that will be applied in this scheme but not in others, we will create a whole series of problems for ourselves. The law already requires the trustees of all occupational pension schemes to state the extent to which social, environmental and ethical considerations have been taken into account in their statement of investment principles. They have to do that now. The legal requirements will apply to the trustee of the personal accounts scheme just as they will in any other scheme. It is possible today for the trustees of various schemes to choose to adhere to the UN principles in the statement of investment principles that they set out. We would applaud them for doing so, but the Liberal Democrats and the Conservatives appear to be advocating that a significant further step should be taken. Effectively, it would rewrite much of trust law. We all agree that the UN principles are good ones, but the Opposition parties seem to believe that the proposed scheme must be required, by law, to adhere to them, even though no other comparable scheme has to do so. I say to the hon. Member for Rochdale (Paul Rowen) that in every other scheme, it is left to the trustees to decide what is contained in the statement of investment.