Proceeding contribution from Lord McKenzie of Luton (Labour) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 10 November 2010. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee proceeding on Superannuation Bill.
Superannuation Bill
I shall speak to Amendment 11 only briefly since it generally goes over ground that we have covered quite extensively so far. It deals with the deletion of the provisions that enable the caps to be extended or revived after they have lapsed. I refer to the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee report, which describes Clause 3(4)(c) as, "““somewhat different and more unusual””." It goes on: "““This provision enables clause 2 to be revived at any time after its expiry or repeal, by order subject to affirmative procedure in the Commons. Paragraph 12 of the memorandum explains that the power is needed ‘if for some reason CSCS amendments cannot be implemented as anticipated’””." It reaches this conclusion: "““The Committee considers that no convincing justification has been made for the unusual power in clause 3(4)(c)””." Clause 3(4)(c) gives the power to revive the provisions. Can the Minister adduce greater justification than has been provided so far to the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee? The Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee’s report also raises the question of to which House the proposed orders are to be made. It focuses on the fact that they will generally, under the Bill, be made to the House of Commons, rather than to your Lordships’ House as well. There were, I know, issues around whether it is a money Bill and whether these are financial provisions, but the report draws parallels with previous legislation that has come before your Lordships’ House. Perhaps in responding the Minister could cover that point as well. My noble friend has not moved her amendment, the thrust of which I support. It seeks to achieve what we seek to achieve by removing the right to revive or extend the sunset clause by a different route. These amendments are all part of a package through which we object to the caps. We certainly object to their continuance and the opportunities for them to be revived after they have otherwise been repealed or lapsed.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 722 c54-5GC
- 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
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 20:46:32 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_679033
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_679033
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_679033