Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Baroness Noakes (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 17 June 2008. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Pensions Bill.


Pensions Bill

I do not find the Minister’s response very satisfactory. Part of the problem is that the DWP now seems to see unscrupulous employers round every corner, which influences its attitude to the way in which the Bill will be approached. That is unfortunate, given that the vast majority of employers are, and wish to be, compliant. The notion of the unscrupulous, non-compliant employer has been raised several times this afternoon and it has permeated all the proceedings and explanations in another place. That is unfortunate. Let us take this case. The Minister is saying that if, for perfectly good reasons, the employer decides to shut one scheme and start another, he must positively enrol all employees even if one says, ““I have done pension saving. I am now 55 and don’t want to save””. Does the employer have to enrol that employee, who then has to opt out? Is the Minister really saying this because of the shadowy fear that there might be the odd unscrupulous employer who could not be caught by some other compliance mechanism?


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
702 c936 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Conditions of employment Directors Age Contributions Advisory services Women Liability Income tax Information Employment agencies Pensioners Personal savings Pay Workplace pensions Pensions National insurance contributions Pension funds Low pay Temporary employment State retirement pensions Young people Small businesses Tax allowances Repayments Taxation Tax rates and bands National employment savings trust scheme
Legislation
Pensions Bill 2007-08
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk