Pensions Bill

moved Amendment No. 123: 123: Clause 20, page 24, line 3, leave out subsection (7) The noble Baroness said: I shall also speak to Amendments Nos. 124 and 125. The amendments concern the guidance that the Secretary of State may give to the delivery authority. We have no problem with the Secretary of State doing that because the Government have refused to countenance my earlier amendments that would have set out the objectives of the delivery authority in statute. I believe that the Secretary of State will have to give guidance to the delivery authority to give it some framework to guide its ability to do anything that it likes, as set out in Clause 20(1). Subsection (7) says that "““the Authority must have regard to””," the guidance, which is getting perilously close to saying that the authority must follow the guidance. In other words, the guidance is a direction clothedin more friendly language. I proposed deleting the subsection on a probing basis to tease out how the Minister expects the guidance to work in practice,and what would happen if the authority, having considered the guidance, decided that it is not appropriate. Let us say that the guidance says, ““Don’t bother to look at crowding out of other savings products, because the Secretary of State is not too fussed””. The authority may think it is an important issue because it has read all the other documents that the Government have published in the past. What will happen if the authority chooses to go in another direction? I cite that example as background to my other amendments in this group. It is essential that that guidance given to the authority is developed in the public arena. Amendment No. 124 says: "““Before issuing guidance … the Secretary of State shall consult””," various persons. The amendment lists the kind of persons whose voices should be heard as guidanceis developed in detail. I have also included the Information Commissioner because of the massive amounts of personal data that will inevitably be held by the personal accounts system. I also cite examples in support of the need forthe guidance to be made public. Amendment No. 125 asks for the guidance to be laid before Parliament and published. I stress that the amendment requires no parliamentary procedure or delay before guidance becomes effective because I recognise that in certain circumstances that may not be practical. I believe in openness and transparency, and as the Bill stands, the authority has only a sketchy remit set out in statute, and it is important to see the guidance given by the Government. Transparency should be enshrined in the Bill. It should not be left on the basis of the Government choosing what to tell Parliament. I beg to move.