Skip to main content

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

We have had this before—not on the previous day in Committee but, I think, the day before—when the noble Lord, Lord McKenzie, insisted on an amendment, which I queried, on the basis that it did not really matter if we got it wrong now because it could all be changed by regulation. I do not have the chapter and verse of it, but when the noble Lord reviews Hansard over the summer, he will see exactly what I am talking about. We are in the same situation again. Although I was not particularly annoyed then, I am becoming extremely annoyed now, and unless the noble Lord, Lord Tunnicliffe, can give a better answer, I shall have to ask the opinion of the Committee.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
703 c1064 
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