Proceeding contribution from Lord Skelmersdale (Conservative) 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
We are getting a little clearer. I can well understand that the trustee, for example, who has given information to the employer who then acts on it might well be prosecutable in certain circumstances, but I fail to understand why, for example, a member of the employer’s HR department should have a compliance notice issued against him, as I would have thought that the employer was responsible for his employees. I do not want to take this any further because it is a rather abstruse argument. I shall read carefully what the noble Lord has tried to explain three times now, which is probably enough for the rest of the Committee. On Question, amendment agreed to.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 703 c51-2
- 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
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2025-01-13 12:48:41 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_488160
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_488160
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_488160