---

Pensions Bill

moved Amendment No. 102: 102: Clause 45, page 21, leave out lines 30 to 33 The noble Lord said: I hope that the Minister—whichever one is to answer—will regard this as a simple probing amendment. Its intention is to establish what sort of co-operation the new subsection at lines 30 to 33 on page 21 will establish. In what circumstances will Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs provide information to the regulator? Will the regulator have to ask specifically if there is evidence of an employer avoiding other obligations, such as compliance with the national minimum wage, or will HMRC spontaneously offer up names of employers whom they consider worth investigating? I note what the Minister said earlier about complaints coming from both HMRC and jobholders, although the majority would appear to be from jobholders. If HMRC spontaneously offers up these names, will there be clear guidance on when information should be offered or will it be entirely ad hoc and dependent on individual HMRC officers who remember that another government body may be able to use the information? I should also like to explore the effectiveness of these growing interorganisational relationships. I recently discussed a similar partnership between HMRC and the Child Support Agency, where a plan to allow for the secondment of officials between bodies looked worthwhile on paper but entirely failed to reached its potential in practice. Is anything similar planned in this instance and, if so, what steps will the Government take to ensure that these secondments are more effective? I beg to move.