Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord McKenzie of Luton (Labour) in the House of Lords on Monday, 30 June 2008. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Pensions Bill.


Pensions Bill

I will try. There are two different things here. As I said, although those employer duties will fall overridingly on employers, there could be instances where an employer duty—for example, in relation to the provision of information—might fall on someone who is not technically the employer. There are further provisions where third-party compliance notices can be given, which is where someone might contribute to the failure of an employer duty. The distinction between those two is that, if the individual to whom the third-party notice is given or is due does not have the employer duty, he or she is not in a position to rectify that failure of duty, although there may be other things that he or she can do. Therefore, there is a distinction between compliance notices relating to employer duties, which could cover people other than those who are technical employers, and third-party compliance notices for those who might contribute to a failure but who themselves do not have the employer duty. I am not sure whether that has confused or enlightened the noble Lord, but I am happy to have another go at it if he thinks that that would help.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
703 c51 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Disclosure of information Devolved matters Crime Company liquidations Administration Cooperation Inspections Fixed penalties Employers' contributions Fines Powers of entry Northern Ireland Workplace pensions Pensions Regulation Take-up Revenue and Customs Pensions Regulator Pensions Regulator Tribunal National employment savings trust scheme
Legislation
Pensions Bill 2007-08
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk