UK Parliament / Open data

Pensions Bill

Proceeding contribution from Lord McKenzie of Luton (Labour) in the House of Lords on Monday, 20 January 2014. It occurred during Debate on bills and Committee proceeding on Pensions Bill.

Nobody disagrees that there could be some limited and carefully targeted exclusions in particular circumstances, but I am trying to understand the circumstances that the Government have currently identified. They have laid out three of them in the briefing document, which suggests that they might have had representations on a whole range of other areas. I reiterate my question: can we know what circumstances, other than the three identified, the Government are focusing on that warrant an exclusion from the provisions?

In particular, one of those that has been identified deals with enhanced or fixed-protection provisions. I accept that there is a financial detriment for people who get auto-enrolment in those circumstances, but HMRC has advised them pretty clearly to opt out in that case. How, specifically, would the Government draft an exclusion to encompass that group of people? The enhanced or fixed-protection status of individuals would not be readily known to employers. Would an employee have to report it to an employer? How is that a better arrangement than the employee simply opting out?

Fundamentally, I am trying to understand how many circumstances the Government have identified where they think there might need to be an exceptional exclusion from auto-enrolment. I accept the Government’s good faith on that remaining the cornerstone of the policy, but how many other circumstances, given all

that has gone on and all the representations and discussions to date, have been identified which warrant this power?

About this proceeding contribution

Reference

751 cc263-4GC 

Session

2013-14

Chamber / Committee

House of Lords Grand Committee

Legislation

Pensions Bill 2013-14
Back to top