Professor Steve Webb (Shadow Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, Work & Pensions; Northavon, Liberal Democrat)

I have a brief observation and question on the supplementary powers of the regulator under clause 6. One of the biggest failings of OPRA, which may not have been its fault—it might only have been to do with its remit—was the lack of reliable information about pension schemes. When we consult the pensions scheme registry, which came under OPRA's remit, the information was always way out of date and incomplete. We will deal later with how many people have lost out, how much they have lost and how we will deal with them, but that issue has been bedevilled throughout by the fact that nobody knows how many people are affected, what they have lost, or how many of them have had their schemes wound up or underfunded.

I am seeking some assurance from the Minister about something that is not explicit in clauses 5 or 6. Although on one hand we are saying, ''You shouldn't overdo the regulation and put too much burden on the schemes,'' the pendulum could swing too far if we are not careful. Does he not accept that the regulator must ensure that there is reliable information, particularly on schemes winding up, underfunding and people who have been affected by such events? Presumably, there will have to be reliable information to feed into the pension protection fund. There has been a dearth of reliable information on such matters, and policy making has suffered as a result. Can the Minister assure us that, either specifically in the Bill or through guidance from the Secretary of State, the regulator will be required to ensure that there is damned good information about occupational pensions? Sadly, that has been all too lacking so far.

See this speech in context