Parliamentary Search

Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Tuesday, 17 June 2008, in the House of Lords.

Pensions Bill

Pensions Bill. Lords Committee stage first day. Clauses 1 to 12 agreed to, with Clauses 3 to 8 agreed to as amended.

Secondary information

Type
Parliamentary proceeding
Reference
702 c920-983,994-1020 
Session
2007-08
Legislative stage
Committee stage
Procedure
New clauses
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Related items
Proceeding contributions
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c939 (Link to this contribution) No, there is. We need to distinguish people whose earnings are below qualifying earnings and people ...
Baroness Hollis of Heigham | 702 c939 (Link to this contribution) If my noble friend is correct, I shared the mistaken assumption of the noble Lord, Lord Skelmersdale...
Show all contributions (193)
Baroness Hollis of Heigham | 702 c937-8 (Link to this contribution) I support the amendment and only wish that the noble Lord had gone further. I would like to see pers...
Lord Dearing | 702 c938-9 (Link to this contribution) What the noble Baroness said seems very persuasive. People who leave school early are least likely t...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c939 (Link to this contribution) This has been an important debate. As we have said before and will doubtless say again before the en...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c939-40 (Link to this contribution) It definitely is the case; I can confirm that. My noble friend makes a very important point about i...
Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay | 702 c940 (Link to this contribution) I deliberately did not intervene earlier because I find this quite a difficult balance to strike in ...
Lord Skelmersdale | 702 c942 (Link to this contribution) I may have been barking up the wrong tree. As I understand it, if you are an adult—22-plus, for thes...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c942 (Link to this contribution) I object most seriously to the fact that the noble Lord takes the word of his noble friend but refus...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c941-2 (Link to this contribution) If you are in and remain in a scheme, the question of re-enrolment does not arise. Issues of re-enro...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c941 (Link to this contribution) I will see how much I can deal with now but I am sure that I will end up writing in any event. On th...
Lord Skelmersdale | 702 c941 (Link to this contribution) I am afraid not, because once you are in the scheme and over 22 you have to re-enrol every three yea...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c940 (Link to this contribution) I have some statistics. I am not sure that they cover precisely what the noble Lord, Lord Oakeshott,...
Lord Skelmersdale | 702 c941 (Link to this contribution) There has obviously been some confusion resulting from the research of various Members of the Commit...
Lord Skelmersdale | 702 c942 (Link to this contribution) I was just suggesting that, for the moment anyway, the Minister might save his breath. If he does no...
Baroness Hollis of Heigham | 702 c940 (Link to this contribution) I would also very much welcome statistics on that. The figures that I gave were for half median earn...
Baroness Hollis of Heigham | 702 c942 (Link to this contribution) I shall see whether I can persuade the noble Lord.
Lord Skelmersdale | 702 c942 (Link to this contribution) I am sure that the noble Baroness will see whether she can persuade me, but at the moment I am—what ...
Lord Skelmersdale | 702 c942 (Link to this contribution) No, not agnostic—suspicious. With that, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave,...
Lord Skelmersdale | 702 c942-3 (Link to this contribution) moved Amendment No. 8: 8: Clause 3, page 2, line 19, after ““reached”” insert ““state”” The noble...
Baroness Turner of Camden | 702 c943 (Link to this contribution) I am puzzled by this. If you insert ““state pension age””, it clearly ties the scheme entirely to th...
Baroness Hollis of Heigham | 702 c943 (Link to this contribution) My question is triggered by the contribution of the noble Lord, Lord Skelmersdale. I had assumed—thi...
Lord Skelmersdale | 702 c942 (Link to this contribution) I could not possibly comment. Enough of this frivolity. I will consider carefully what the Minister ...
Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay | 702 c942 (Link to this contribution) It sounds like a case of, ““Trust me—I’m not a Minister””.
Lord Kirkwood of Kirkhope | 702 c947-8 (Link to this contribution) I would like to add a brief contribution to this well focused amendment. There is a much broader deb...
Baroness Greengross | 702 c948 (Link to this contribution) I add my support to what noble Lords have been saying. It is essential that we get the right advice ...
Baroness Hollis of Heigham | 702 c945-7 (Link to this contribution) I declare an interest as trustee of the Pensions Advisory Service. I welcome the amendment. Whether ...
Bishop of Durham | 702 c948-9 (Link to this contribution) I support what has been said, but I was surprised to see in the amendment the words, "““at least one...
Lord Skelmersdale | 702 c949-50 (Link to this contribution) The right reverend Prelate has hit two nails very firmly on the head. ““Generic financial advice”” i...
Lord Skelmersdale | 702 c944 (Link to this contribution) So, the Bill as printed is confusing and the Explanatory Notes are right—I think that in précis is w...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c943-4 (Link to this contribution) I shall not repeat the opening remark of my speaking notes, which says that automatic enrolment is a...
Lord Dearing | 702 c924 (Link to this contribution) Perhaps the proposed introductory clause is imperfect, but I would be interested to know if the Mini...
Lord Lyell | 702 c924 (Link to this contribution) I wonder if the Minister is aiming at me as the open target. I am 69 years old, I have not changed s...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c923-4 (Link to this contribution) I welcome the opportunity for a brief Second Reading debate about the principles of the Bill, and we...
Lord Lyell | 702 c922-3 (Link to this contribution) At the outset, I apologise to the Committee for not being available to be here on Second Reading. In...
Baroness Thomas of Winchester | 702 c924 (Link to this contribution) I feel slightly warmer about the amendment than does my noble friend on the Front Bench. I would cal...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c920 (Link to this contribution) My Lords, I beg to move that the House do now resolve itself into Committee on this Bill. Moved acc...
Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay | 702 c922 (Link to this contribution) We on these Benches support the amendment, and if the noble Lord chooses to press it to a Division w...
Lord Skelmersdale | 702 c920-2 (Link to this contribution) moved Amendment No. 1: 1: Before Clause 1, insert the following new Clause— ““General objective of...
Lord Tunnicliffe | 702 c930-1 (Link to this contribution) Up until a few weeks ago I, too, would be declaring an interest in this and I, too, confirm that bot...
Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay | 702 c930 (Link to this contribution) This seems a very sensible and reasonable amendment. Almost by definition, non-executives are in off...
Baroness Noakes | 702 c929-30 (Link to this contribution) moved Amendment No. 4: 4: Clause 1, page 1, line 8, at end insert— ““( ) who is not a non-executiv...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c929 (Link to this contribution) moved Amendment No. 3: 3: Clause 1, page 1, line 8, leave out ““a”” and insert ““the worker’s”” O...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c928 (Link to this contribution) I am grateful for the responses from both noble Lords, particularly from my noble friend who has ref...
Baroness Turner of Camden | 702 c928 (Link to this contribution) I thank the Minister for this amendment. I have received a briefing from the TUC, which is also very...
Lord Skelmersdale | 702 c928 (Link to this contribution) I am grateful to the Minister for sending me a grid of government amendments, some of which, like th...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c927-8 (Link to this contribution) moved Amendment No. 2: 2: Clause 1, page 1, line 7, leave out ““an employee or”” and insert ““a”” ...
Lord Skelmersdale | 702 c925 (Link to this contribution) I am extremely grateful to all noble Lords who have taken part in this short debate. I say to the no...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c925 (Link to this contribution) That is an entirely reasonable request and I am certainly happy to see if what I sense is the view o...
Lord Skelmersdale | 702 c932 (Link to this contribution) moved Amendment No. 5: 5: Clause 2, page 2, line 4, leave out ““, or make any omission,”” The nob...
Baroness Noakes | 702 c931-2 (Link to this contribution) I raise this as a technical issue. It needs to be clear beyond peradventure, because otherwise it wo...
Lord Skelmersdale | 702 c934 (Link to this contribution) I am grateful to the Minister, who need have no fear on this occasion; I described this as a probing...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c932-4 (Link to this contribution) I shall speak to government amendments in this group and to Amendment No. 5, which I ask the Committ...
Lord Tunnicliffe | 702 c931 (Link to this contribution) I thought that might raise an outcry—as they are not employed under contract for their services by t...
Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay | 702 c931 (Link to this contribution) Did I hear the Minister right? Did he say non-executive directors are not under contract? They might...
Baroness Noakes | 702 c936 (Link to this contribution) I said that this was a probing amendment, so I shall not press the point. Instead, I shall ask the L...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c936 (Link to this contribution) In essence, that is the thrust of the Government’s position. Of course, I accept that the vast major...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c934 (Link to this contribution) moved Amendment No. 6: 6: Clause 2, page 2, line 4, leave out from ““which”” to end of line 6 and ...
Lord Skelmersdale | 702 c934 (Link to this contribution) I am delighted to hear that, but we will see. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by ...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c934 (Link to this contribution) I am sure that we will debate that in some detail, but the Government are keen to make sure that all...
Baroness Noakes | 702 c936 (Link to this contribution) I do not find the Minister’s response very satisfactory. Part of the problem is that the DWP now see...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c935-6 (Link to this contribution) Automatic enrolment, as we have said, will establish a presumption to save as the new default. After...
Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay | 702 c935 (Link to this contribution) I defer to no one in my admiration for Scottish solicitors. I have the pleasure of dealing with them...
Baroness Noakes | 702 c934-5 (Link to this contribution) moved Amendment No. 6A: 6A: Clause 2, page 2, line 12, at end insert— ““( ) Subsection (1) is not ...
Lord Skelmersdale | 702 c1004 (Link to this contribution) Yet again I am grateful to the Minister, but he is beginning to become a little repetitive. At least...
Baroness Hollis of Heigham | 702 c1004 (Link to this contribution) What moral did the noble Lord draw from that?
Lord Skelmersdale | 702 c1005 (Link to this contribution) That I needed to put on weight. I still do. I came to that conclusion—not with my wife but with the ...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c1005 (Link to this contribution) Before the noble Lord formally withdraws the amendment, perhaps I may pick up on a couple of points ...
Lord Skelmersdale | 702 c1005 (Link to this contribution) I am grateful for that further clarification. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by ...
Baroness Noakes | 702 c1005-6 (Link to this contribution) moved Amendment No. 40: 40: After Clause 9, insert the following new Clause— ““Protection for empl...
Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay | 702 c1006-7 (Link to this contribution) We think this is a good amendment. We are very much in favour of clarity where advice is concerned a...
Lord Skelmersdale | 702 c1002-3 (Link to this contribution) moved Amendment No. 39: 39: Clause 9, page 6, line 3, leave out paragraph (c) The noble Lord said...
Lord Skelmersdale | 702 c1009-10 (Link to this contribution) When the Minister gave me the opportunity the other day to quiz the chairman of the Personal Account...
Lord Skelmersdale | 702 c1008-9 (Link to this contribution) Clause 11 is about a possible postponement of the employers’ duties. We had an interesting probing d...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c1009 (Link to this contribution) I shall do my best to relieve the mind of the noble Lord, Lord Skelmersdale, but I would not presume...
Lord Skelmersdale | 702 c1010 (Link to this contribution) moved Amendment No. 40A: 40A: Clause 12, page 6, line 32, leave out paragraph (a) The noble Lord ...
Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay | 702 c1010 (Link to this contribution) This really does seem to be déjà vu, does it not? I look forward to hearing the Minister read out wh...
Baroness Noakes | 702 c1008 (Link to this contribution) I thank the noble Lord, Lord Oakeshott, and the noble Baroness, Lady Hollis, for their support for t...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c1007-8 (Link to this contribution) As explained, the proposed new clause seeks reassurance that we will not be asking employers to prov...
Baroness Hollis of Heigham | 702 c1007 (Link to this contribution) Like others, I think this is a useful amendment, simply for its clarification. The Government intend...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c983 (Link to this contribution) moved Amendment No. 37: 37: Clause 8, page 5, line 32, leave out paragraph (a) On Question, amend...
Baroness Royall of Blaisdon | 702 c983 (Link to this contribution) I beg to move that the House do now resume. In moving this Motion, I suggest that the Committee stag...
Baroness Hollis of Heigham | 702 c994-7 (Link to this contribution) moved Amendment No. 38: 38: After Clause 8, insert the following new Clause— ““Workers without qua...
Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay | 702 c997 (Link to this contribution) We like the amendment. The principle seems very fair and the noble Baroness made a powerful case. It...
Baroness Noakes | 702 c982-3 (Link to this contribution) moved Amendment No. 35: 35: After Clause 7, insert the following new Clause— ““Jobholder’s further...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c983 (Link to this contribution) I thank the noble Baroness for her amendment. I suspect she has probably anticipated my response. Cl...
Baroness Noakes | 702 c983 (Link to this contribution) I am disappointed in the Minister. The Government seem quite prepared to heap unnecessary burdens on...
Lord Skelmersdale | 702 c981-2 (Link to this contribution) There are some moments when I get the idea that I am being dropped on from a great height. This is o...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c1000-1 (Link to this contribution) I accept that that is what the amendment states. Officials and I thought that its import was differe...
Baroness Hollis of Heigham | 702 c1001-2 (Link to this contribution) It is probably the first time that I have been criticised for an amendment that might be correctly a...
Baroness Hollis of Heigham | 702 c1000 (Link to this contribution) I accept any faults in drafting, but my amendment states: ““Where a jobholder elects”” or chooses, "...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c1000 (Link to this contribution) I thought that was the import of the amendment, which means I can probably disregard most of my scri...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c999-1000 (Link to this contribution) I thank my noble friend for this amendment and as ever, the challenge that comes with it. I say to m...
Lord Skelmersdale | 702 c998-9 (Link to this contribution) I say straight away that I agree with the noble Baroness, Lady Hollis, that those who will be disadv...
Baroness Howe of Idlicote | 702 c997 (Link to this contribution) I strongly support the amendment. The whole Bill is based on the need for flexibility—above all, to ...
Lord Skelmersdale | 702 c974 (Link to this contribution) I am still trying to discover when these changes, if necessary, will actually be laid; that is, whet...
Lord Skelmersdale | 702 c974 (Link to this contribution) But the affirmative procedure would entail a change to the Bill as, indeed, would removing the power...
Lord Tunnicliffe | 702 c974 (Link to this contribution) I am terribly sorry, but as I understand it, the option is in front of us. Either we set criteria ab...
Lord Skelmersdale | 702 c974 (Link to this contribution) On that basis, I really have no option but to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdraw...
Lord Tunnicliffe | 702 c974 (Link to this contribution) We are confused. I will send the noble Lord a letter.
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c974-6 (Link to this contribution) moved Amendment No. 24: 24: Clause 7, page 4, line 26, leave out subsections (2) to (6) and insert...
Baroness Noakes | 702 c977-8 (Link to this contribution) moved, as an amendment to Amendment No. 24, Amendment No. 25: 25: Clause 7, line 3, after ““purpos...
Viscount Ullswater | 702 c977 (Link to this contribution) I must advise the Committee that, if the amendment is agreed to, I will not be able to call Amendmen...
Baroness Turner of Camden | 702 c978 (Link to this contribution) I realise, of course, that my amendment has been ruled out by the Minister’s amendment. It is not my...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c980 (Link to this contribution) I shall try to tidy up one or two points. In terms of where the money is, it depends on the arrangem...
Lord Skelmersdale | 702 c979-80 (Link to this contribution) If the money has been taken from the employee’s salary, it must go somewhere. It does not matter whe...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c979 (Link to this contribution) Let me see whether I can deal with the residual matters that I did not cover when I moved the amendm...
Lord Skelmersdale | 702 c978-9 (Link to this contribution) I suppose, technically and formally, we ought to withdraw the first amendment to the amendment befor...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c980 (Link to this contribution) moved Amendment No. 33: 33: Clause 7, page 4, line 43, after ““signed”” insert ““or otherwise auth...
Lord Skelmersdale | 702 c980 (Link to this contribution) The Minister could have saved an awful lot of time if he had said, ““I will tell you when I know””.
Lord Skelmersdale | 702 c980-1 (Link to this contribution) moved Amendment No. 34: 34: Clause 7, page 4, line 43, at end insert— ““(8) A job holder may give ...
Lord Kirkwood of Kirkhope | 702 c968 (Link to this contribution) I said earlier—I believe it to be true—that auto-enrolment is crucial to the success of the policy. ...
Lord Skelmersdale | 702 c967-8 (Link to this contribution) My amendment to line 28, leaving out subsection (6), has been grouped with this amendment for perfec...
Lord Skelmersdale | 702 c969 (Link to this contribution) I am grateful. For once I was not suggesting that there was anything sinister here, although I sugge...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c968-9 (Link to this contribution) I very much agree with the noble Lord, Lord Kirkwood, about the importance of enrolment, auto-enrolm...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c966-7 (Link to this contribution) moved Amendment No. 15: 15: Clause 5, page 3, line 21, after ““jobholder”” insert ““— (a) ”” The ...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c970 (Link to this contribution) moved Amendment No. 21: 21: After Clause 5, insert the following new Clause— ““Timing of automatic...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c969-70 (Link to this contribution) moved Amendments Nos. 16 to 18: 16: Clause 5, page 3, line 22, at end insert ““, or (b) gave notic...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c969 (Link to this contribution) I confirm that the employer will be the instigator of some information—it will have to be, because i...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c970 (Link to this contribution) moved Amendment No. 20: 20: Clause 5, page 3, line 29, leave out from ““regulations”” to end of li...
Lord Skelmersdale | 702 c972-3 (Link to this contribution) I was not going to comment on that House of Lords faux pas, but I point out that towards the end of ...
Lord Tunnicliffe | 702 c971-2 (Link to this contribution) My notes cover Amendment No. 138. I believe it has simply been omitted from the Marshalled List. I w...
Baroness Hollis of Heigham | 702 c971 (Link to this contribution) My list says only Amendments Nos. 137 and 139. It may be that the Marshalled List is changing by the...
Lord Tunnicliffe | 702 c971 (Link to this contribution) I am not prepared for such a change in position, so I will have to improvise. I rise to speak to gov...
Lord Skelmersdale | 702 c971 (Link to this contribution) moved Amendment No. 22: 22: Clause 6, page 4, line 5, at end insert— ““( ) The first regulations u...
Lord Tunnicliffe | 702 c973-4 (Link to this contribution) The last thing I want to do is offend the Committee in any way. Taking the simple position, we are d...
Lord Skelmersdale | 702 c973 (Link to this contribution) I strongly agree with the noble Baroness, Lady Hollis—she may think ““for once””, but in fact I have...
Baroness Hollis of Heigham | 702 c973 (Link to this contribution) I disagree with that point of view as someone who has been in a similar position. Time and again, th...
Lord Kirkwood of Kirkhope | 702 c973 (Link to this contribution) Perhaps I may add a pedantic word here. I generally support what the noble Lord, Lord Skelmersdale, ...
Baroness Noakes | 702 c959-61 (Link to this contribution) moved Amendment No. 11: 11: After Clause 3, insert the following new Clause— ““Tax effect of autom...
Lord Lyell | 702 c961-2 (Link to this contribution) I was alerted to this amendment when I looked through the Marshalled List earlier today. I was certa...
Lord Kirkwood of Kirkhope | 702 c958-9 (Link to this contribution) My noble friend has made the point for me, but I would like the Minister to clarify something that m...
Baroness Noakes | 702 c963 (Link to this contribution) The Minister will have plenty of time on later amendments to debate how the bands will be uprated, s...
Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay | 702 c962 (Link to this contribution) The noble Baroness raised some very pertinent points. This is probably the occasion in my life when ...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c962-3 (Link to this contribution) I am grateful to the noble Baroness for raising this important point. It has prompted us to reflect ...
Lord Skelmersdale | 702 c958 (Link to this contribution) There was a lot of discussion on this subject in another place, where the Government committed thems...
Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay | 702 c958 (Link to this contribution) After the Sturm und Drang of the last debate, we seem to be back in the calmer waters of government ...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c964 (Link to this contribution) moved Amendments Nos. 12 to 14: 12: Clause 4, page 2, line 41, leave out ““or with regulations und...
Lord Skelmersdale | 702 c964-5 (Link to this contribution) Despite the debate in Commons Committee on 22 January, reporter at cols. 174-9, where Members of tha...
Lord Skelmersdale | 702 c966 (Link to this contribution) I understand this and it would be. I pick up, from what the Minister has just said, that this is not...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c963 (Link to this contribution) I am happy to do that. I was just going to emphasise that the objective is that they should increase...
Baroness Noakes | 702 c963 (Link to this contribution) I thank the Minister for that careful reply and other noble Lords for taking part in the debate. I t...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c954-5 (Link to this contribution) I shall try to be more expansive on that. A range of work is going on, including the workshop set in...
Lord Kirkwood of Kirkhope | 702 c955 (Link to this contribution) The noble Lord is making heavy weather of this and I do not think that he is winning. The benefit of...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c955 (Link to this contribution) I am not saying that. Of course there will be people for whom it will not pay to save. The propositi...
Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay | 702 c955 (Link to this contribution) Either deliberately or accidentally the Minister does not understand the point. No one is saying tha...
Baroness Thomas of Winchester | 702 c956 (Link to this contribution) I am grateful to all noble Lords who have spoken in the debate. I was going to say ““short”” debate,...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c955-6 (Link to this contribution) I note that the noble Lord referred to people who were likely to be a significant part of that group...
Baroness Thomas of Winchester | 702 c956 (Link to this contribution) If there is no duty on employers, an employee can be left absolutely in the dark. We must come back ...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c956 (Link to this contribution) I just want to refer to the role of the employer and the information that he makes available. This i...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c956 (Link to this contribution) moved Amendment No. 10: 10: Clause 3, page 2, line 28, leave out subsection (5) and insert— ““(5A)...
Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay | 702 c952 (Link to this contribution) Of course nobody believes that inevitably everyone is going to need face-to-face advice, but does th...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c952-3 (Link to this contribution) I am sure that it is the case that there will be individuals who need very specific advice, as I am ...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c951-2 (Link to this contribution) This has been an interesting and informed debate on an important subject. I am pleased that the nobl...
Baroness Noakes | 702 c954 (Link to this contribution) Regarding what the noble Baroness has just said, the pathfinders will not deal with auto-enrolment a...
Baroness Hollis of Heigham | 702 c953-4 (Link to this contribution) Perhaps my noble friend can help me on a somewhat different point, to which he also referred, about ...
Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay | 702 c953 (Link to this contribution) That is not what anyone is saying and the Minister knows that perfectly well. The fact is that on th...
Lord Skelmersdale | 702 c954 (Link to this contribution) I do not think that I was asleep, but I did not understand: what process? The noble Lords said ““tha...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c954 (Link to this contribution) It is right that there are two pilots. I believe that my noble friend’s description of the timeframe...
Lord Skelmersdale | 702 c1015-6 (Link to this contribution) moved Amendment No. 42: 42: Clause 12, page 6, line 40, leave out paragraph (a) The noble Lord sa...
Baroness Noakes | 702 c1014-5 (Link to this contribution) I thank the noble Baroness, Lady Hollis, for her comments and the Minister for his reply. He has con...
Lord Tunnicliffe | 702 c1020 (Link to this contribution) I beg to move that the House do now resume. Moved accordingly, and, on Question, Motion agreed to. ...
Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay | 702 c1017-8 (Link to this contribution) I have some sympathy with what the noble Baroness has said, although it is probably worth saying a f...
Baroness Hollis of Heigham | 702 c1016-7 (Link to this contribution) I am in some difficulty here. I am not sure whether we should be debating the issue of basic versus ...
Lord Skelmersdale | 702 c1020 (Link to this contribution) I am extremely grateful to the Minister. I am sorry if I have caused difficulty for some Members of ...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c1018-9 (Link to this contribution) I find myself in no difficulty, for once. This is genuinely work in progress for the Government. I h...
Lord Skelmersdale | 702 c1011 (Link to this contribution) When I get to read Hansard, I shall have to compare that answer to the one given to the noble Barone...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c1010-1 (Link to this contribution) I thank the noble Lord, Lord Skelmersdale, for the amendment. Qualifying earnings will be calculated...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c1014 (Link to this contribution) I am happy to write and provide any stats we have. However, I reaffirm the principle that if we alig...
Baroness Hollis of Heigham | 702 c1013-4 (Link to this contribution) Does my noble friend have access to any formal projection of stats on this? I can see why it may hap...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c1013 (Link to this contribution) I thank the noble Baroness for giving me the opportunity to set out the Government’s policy on this ...
Baroness Noakes | 702 c1012-3 (Link to this contribution) moved Amendment No. 41: 41: Clause 12, page 6, line 32, leave out from ““than”” to end of line 33 ...
Lord Skelmersdale | 702 c1012 (Link to this contribution) That was interesting. Of course the difference between the amendment of the noble Baroness, Lady Hol...
Baroness Hollis of Heigham | 702 c1011-2 (Link to this contribution) Perhaps I can help my noble friend and the noble Lord, Lord Skelmersdale. I would love to have run w...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c1011 (Link to this contribution) In what respect would the noble Lord say that the response conflicts with my response to my noble fr...
Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay | 702 c950-1 (Link to this contribution) As I drafted this amendment, I think that it is only fair for me to respond and explain, particularl...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c1003-4 (Link to this contribution) Clause 9 recognises that individuals will need access to relevant and accurate information about the...
Baroness Hollis of Heigham | 702 c1000 (Link to this contribution) I am sorry if I was less than clear on that. I was trying to exclude people whose earnings in a part...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c974 (Link to this contribution) moved Amendment No. 23: 23: Clause 6, page 4, line 6, leave out subsection (5) and insert— ““(5A) ...
Baroness Noakes | 702 c980 (Link to this contribution) To reiterate what my noble friend said, the Minister has demonstrated that the Government have very ...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c981 (Link to this contribution) Clause 7 is essential to the reforms, as it enables jobholders to opt out. We are keen to ensure tha...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c959 (Link to this contribution) Perhaps we should start with the concept of the Government having a ““heart of hearts””. I reassure ...
Baroness Thomas of Winchester | 702 c944-5 (Link to this contribution) moved Amendment No. 9: 9: Clause 3, page 2, line 22, at end insert ““provided that, in the case of...
Lord Tunnicliffe | 702 c931 (Link to this contribution) I am sure the noble Baroness works very hard but company law details directors as office-holders and...
Lord Skelmersdale | 702 c936-7 (Link to this contribution) moved Amendment No. 7: 7: Clause 3, page 2, line 18, leave out paragraph (a) The noble Lord said:...
Lord Skelmersdale | 702 c939 (Link to this contribution) There is no automatic employer contribution.
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c924 (Link to this contribution) If we set out something at the start of the Bill which we say encapsulates its objectives and it doe...
Baroness Noakes | 702 c931 (Link to this contribution) Before the Minister replies, as I mentioned at the outset, I declare an interest: I am a non-executi...
Baroness Dean of Thornton-le-Fylde | 702 c999 (Link to this contribution) I support the amendment, to which my name is attached. As one would expect, my noble friend Lady Hol...
Baroness Noakes | 702 c963-4 (Link to this contribution) Perhaps very reasonable, as the Minister's noble friend suggests. I will consider carefully what th...
Lord McKenzie of Luton | 702 c965-6 (Link to this contribution) I thank the noble Lord for the opportunity to put clearly on the record what the clause is about. It...
Notes
Appears in Lords Hansard in two parts but amalgamated here.
Subjects
Conditions of employment Directors Age Contributions Advisory services Women Liability Income tax Information Employment agencies Pensioners Personal savings Pay Workplace pensions Pensions National insurance contributions Pension funds Low pay Temporary employment State retirement pensions Young people Small businesses Tax allowances Repayments Taxation Tax rates and bands National employment savings trust scheme
Legislation
Pensions Bill 2007-08
Link
View this Parliamentary proceeding on www.publications.parliament.uk