Proceeding contribution from Lord Lea of Crondall (Labour) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 7 October 2008. It occurred during Debate on bill on Pensions Bill.
Pensions Bill
My Lords, I very much follow the line of what has just been said. The argument which the noble Baroness, Lady Noakes, seemed to put forth in her analogy is that, as a figure is mentioned in Clause 13 and it is reviewable in Clause 14, the logical corollary would be to provide a figure in Clause 69. But I do not think that that is a logical corollary at all. Is that the nature of the argument? Amendment No. 49 refers to reviewing the value in the same way as Clause 14 does, but Clause 14 is reviewing the value of the figure in Clause 13. Will my noble friend comment on the apparent belief that this is simply a logical corollary of having the figure in the Bill in the first place?
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 704 c185
- Session
- 2007-08
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Contributions Advisory services Fixed penalties Investment Information Insolvency Ethics Personal income Pay Workplace pensions Pensions Personal pensions Pension funds Pension rights Pensions Ombudsman Tribunals Small businesses Tax allowances Taxation Pensions Regulator Personal Accounts Delivery Authority Occupational money purchase schemes 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 12:50:33 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_497365
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_497365
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_497365