My Lords, I obviously welcome this amendment. I, too, am puzzled at the use of the word ““must”” rather than ““shall””, which is conventional parliamentary counsel language, but no doubt it is desirable if it adds extra emphasis. Subsection (1)(b) of the proposed new clause refers to, "““the effect of any restrictions on rights to transfer into the scheme or transfer out to another pension scheme””."
Does that mean that, despite my understanding of the assurances from the Minister about the department’s approach to stranded pots, nothing will be done before 2017 and only then will it be reviewed; therefore, any action may take until one or two years after that? People may find that any money they put into a personal account between 2012 and 2017 could end up being a stranded pot because they cannot move it into another pot that they already hold. I should like some assurances that stranded pots will be dealt with as of now and not postponed to 2017. It is an injustice. It is institutional theft of money and should not happen.
All this is on the accountability of the Secretary of State to Parliament once the report has been completed. Will my noble friend assure me that, as regards the scope of such a report, there will be either a letter to which we can respond or, better still, a debate or some other format so that Members of your Lordships’ House can add to the shopping list of issues to be reviewed in the report and not merely depend on such other matters as the Secretary of State may direct? I could conceive that the views of the Secretary of State as to what should be reviewed could be at odds with what many of your Lordships might wish to see reviewed. I do not want to see those issues missed because the power lies exclusively with the Secretary of State to determine the report’s content. I ask my noble friend to assure us that vehicles will be devised, of whatever form, for this House and, no doubt, the other place, as well as other stakeholders and players in the field of pensions, to have input on the issues of concern, to the person handling this report, back to the Secretary of State and then on to Parliament.
Pensions Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Hollis of Heigham
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 19 November 2008.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Pensions Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
705 c1149-50 Session
2007-08Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 23:07:14 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_510443
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_510443
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_510443