Skip to main content

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

I am grateful for that answer. I was questioning why it was necessary to include ““vary”” in subsection (6)(a), although I did not express it in those terms. I have still not received a particularly clear answer, with or without the intervention of the noble Lord, Lord Oakeshott. However, that was only a tiny part of what I was after. It is clear that the suspension of a notice while it is being reviewed is in suspension, if I may put it that way. Over the summer the Government will consider how they intend to respond to the Constitution Committee’s suggestions and will come back with amendments on Report. I am extremely grateful for that and I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. [Amendment No. 95 not moved.] Clause 38 agreed to. Clause 39 [References to the Pensions Regulator Tribunal]:


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
703 c70 
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