Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord McKenzie of Luton (Labour) in the House of Lords on Monday, 23 June 2008. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Pensions Bill.


Pensions Bill

I just explained in response to the amendments from my noble friend Lady Turner our approach to uprating the earnings bands, and in particular the importance of maintaining flexibility. However, these amendments would do away with that flexibility by removing the possibility of uprating by any method other than earnings bands. We must remember that these reforms are for the long term. While we fully expect to uprate the limits of the earnings band in line with changes to average earnings, we do not have 20/20 foresight. The clause avoids tying the hands of future Governments when it comes to ensuring that the earnings bands maintain their value. It is crucial that this remains the case. We always have this dilemma where we have a clear policy and objective and believe that uprating by earnings is the right way forward. However, given that we are setting down reforms for decades to come, there must be a strong argument in favour of flexibility. That is why the clause is structured as it is, as I explained in response to the previous amendments. I hope that, on that basis, the noble Baroness will feel able not to press her amendment to a vote.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
702 c1266-7 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Women Gender Financial Services Authority Index linking Individual savings accounts Personal savings Pay Workplace pensions Pensions Lump sum payments Migrant workers State retirement pensions Regulation Tax allowances Average earnings Pensions Regulator Occupational money purchase schemes National employment savings trust scheme
Legislation
Pensions Bill 2007-08
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk