Pensions Bill

My Lords, I am grateful for that answer. The only problem is that my understanding is that the requirement for the regulator to be reasonable is limited by the regulator’s functions and powers. In other words, the regulator has to be reasonable only in respect of what it is required by statute to do, which is to look out for the interests of the fund and the pensioners. It has no duties imposed on it with respect to other parties such as the company running the fund or, as it were, the company whose pensioners are being looked after, or other parties who might be involved, such as individuals. So the duty of reasonableness does not extend to them. Where the regulator is required to judge whether something is reasonable, that is, of course, an overall reasonableness; but where the regulator might be required to be reasonable, that is a limited protection for a third party, such as an individual, who might find themselves caught up in it. My understanding is that there is little point in their placing reliance on that because the regulator can do what it likes without tripping over unreasonableness; the regulator is not required to be reasonable in respect of functions which it does not have. The Minister was painting a rosy picture. If he wishes to say anything else, I should be delighted; otherwise I may wish to return to that point later.