Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord McKenzie of Luton (Labour) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 1 December 2010. It occurred during Debate on bill on Superannuation Bill.


Superannuation Bill

My Lords, I thank the Minister for his explanation of why the Government are unable to accept this amendment. As I explained when I introduced it, we did not propose to test the opinion of the House, but simply to probe alternatives to the use of the caps as the default position. With respect, the Minister has said why he does not like our formulation, but he has not dealt with the point about what formulations other than the caps have been considered to create the certainty that he seeks and considers is necessary in circumstances where there is a challenge. We do not object to Parliament deciding in an Act of Parliament what that default position should be. I take the point that the formulation of our amendment could be seen as seeking to oust the power of the courts.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
722 c1491-2 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Conditions of employment Compensation Civil service Employment Pay Workplace pensions Redundancy pay Redundancy
Legislation
Superannuation Bill 2010-12
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk