Pensions Bill

moved Amendment No. 114: 114: Clause 20, page 23, line 27, at end insert— ““( ) In carrying out its functions under subsection (1), the Authority shall aim to secure that there is effective co-operation between itself, the Pensions Regulator, the Financial Services Authority and the Secretary of State.”” The noble Baroness said: I shall speak also to Amendment No. 117. Both these amendments have as their motivation the need to reduce burdens on business. Amendment No. 114 proposes that the delivery authority should seek to ensure effective co-operation between the Pensions Regulator, the Financial Services Authority and the Secretary of State. The amendment is particularly important given the Government’s decision to accept the conclusion of the Thornton review that the regulatory structure affecting pensions should not be changed. Amendment No. 117 is the broader of the two amendments in the group since it requires the delivery authority to minimise burdens on employers. The NAPF estimated only last week that the personal accounts system would add £2 billion a year to the cost of providing pensions. This is not a trivial sum and could well impact on the level of provision that employers are prepared to offer. The way in which the new scheme is designed—this is relevant to the delivery authority, which will be involved in preparing the scheme for implementation—can have a big impact on employers and the delivery authority has to have that in mind as it makes its preparations or gives advice. For example, there are bound to be record-keeping or inspection requirements and they need to be designed in a proportionate way and not, for example, on the premise that all employers are set upon non-compliance with the rules. In addition, the design of the transition from existing systems to personal accounts and waiting periods will have a very direct impact on employers. Small businesses could be very hard hit by those arrangements. Much of the burden on employers will be regulatory in nature. Since there will be competing regulators which will need to co-ordinate when the scheme is up and running, the design must ensure that that co-ordination is maximised. For example, if information returns are required under the scheme—which there will be all over the place—we need to ensure that the employer is asked for information once only in a way that will meet the needs of all who are likely to use it. For those reasons we think that the burdens on business—I refer to my AmendmentNo. 122, if not Amendment No. 114—ought to be set in the statute so that the delivery authority will properly give attention to those issues as it carries out its work. I beg to move.