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
There is nothing wrong with it. The noble Baroness was advancing the proposition that, if people manipulated their pay structures to reduce their contributions, the compliance regime would pick that up. However, it would be difficult to rely on the compliance regime to distinguish those situations from situations where there was a genuine commercial reason to restructure pay or a dual reason to restructure pay. That is why we do not see that as a route forward. It is a similar situation with grandfathering arrangements. You might identify up-front schemes that were okay, but there might be legitimate commercial reasons for restructuring pay down the line. I stress that I believe that there is a way through this, using mechanisms other than those that the noble Baroness has identified. We need to make sure that we achieve that.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 702 c1301
- 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
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2025-01-13 12:48:27 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_485671
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_485671
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_485671