Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Wallace of Saltaire (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 10 November 2010. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee proceeding on Superannuation Bill.


Superannuation Bill

Since the High Court judgment—since, indeed, one of the unions decided to take what had until then been negotiations to judicial review—we find ourselves in a situation where it is possible that judicial review may be used as a means of delaying the introduction of the scheme. If that litigation were to take a sufficiently long time, the current default would be the previously existing scheme. Now, the previous Government negotiated for some 18 months to change that scheme, rightly insisting—and having the agreement of the unions—that the previous scheme was no longer viable or affordable. We wish to make it absolutely certain that, in the event of continuing litigation, the default to any failure to introduce the new scheme would be enshrined in primary legislation, which is therefore much less open to judicial challenge. That is the justification for Clause 2.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
722 c48GC 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Conditions of employment Compensation Civil servants Civil service Redundancy pay Public consultation Redundancy Reform Trade unions Sunset clauses
Legislation
Superannuation Bill 2010-12
Superannuation Act 1972
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk