Proceeding contribution from Lord Skelmersdale (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Monday, 14 July 2008. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Pensions Bill.
Pensions Bill
Like the noble Baroness, Lady Hollis, we on these Benches have no problem with the Government’s policy on pension sharing, either on divorce or the dissolution of a civil partnership. That extends to that occurrence within the ambit of the Pension Protection Fund. I am not surprised that the Minister read his brief at such speed. I certainly did not understand all of it and I cheekily rather wonder whether he did either. However, the key amendment in the group, as I understand it, is Amendment No. 130ZC, which relates only to Scotland. It reads a little oddly when compared with Clause 93. Subsection (2) states that Clause 93(1)(f) or (g) is to be disregarded if the board of the PPF does not receive certain information before two months have elapsed. I have no problem with paragraph (f) being disregarded, but paragraph (g) states that, "““any provision corresponding to provision which may be made by such an order, and which … is contained in a qualifying agreement between the parties to a marriage or the partners in a civil partnership, … is in such form as the Secretary of State may prescribe by regulations, and … takes effect on the grant, in relation to the marriage, of decree of divorce or a declarator or nullity or (as the case may be) on the grant, in relation to the civil partnership, of decree of dissolution or of declarator of nullity””—" those, I assume, are Scottish expressions— "““except where the provision relates to the same rights to PPF compensation as are the subject of an order made under section 12B(2) of the Family Law (Scotland) Act 1985 (order for payment of capital sum: pension compensation)””." Why is the disregarding provision in the Scottish clause but not in the English clause? I would be very happy to receive one of the Minister’s letters if he could not answer me now—and I would readily understand why he could not.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 703 c1043-4
- Session
- 2007-08
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Compensation Companies Annuities Competition Administrative delays Equality Health Eligibility Gender Income tax Divorce Insolvency Discrimination Financial assistance scheme Index linking Private sector Workplace pensions Pensions Lump sum payments Pension Protection Fund PAYE Scotland State retirement pensions Regulation Taxation Retirement State earnings related pension scheme Pensions Regulator Private equity Civil partnerships dissolution State second pension Impact assessments
- Legislation
- Pensions Bill 2007-08
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-16 00:09:46 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_492146
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_492146
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_492146