Pensions Bill

Roger Gale (North Thanet, Conservative)

Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Before we start, the hon. Member for Eastbourne, who is leading for the Opposition, has raised a point that I should have covered in my opening remarks.

I have a standard practice about stand part debates. As far as I am concerned, it is often convenient to discuss the breadth of a clause at the start rather than at the end, because it makes other things easier in the course of debating amendments. I have no problem with that whatsoever. However, that is all right on the very clear understanding that hon. Members cannot have two stand part debates. If I let hon. Members go slightly wider than I otherwise might in debating the amendments, they should not be surprised when I say at the end that the clause has been satisfactorily discussed and I am not permitting a stand part debate. It is in hon. Members’ hands, so they should make up their minds and decide how they want to play it.

Nigel Waterson (Shadow Minister, Work & Pensions; Eastbourne, Conservative)

Good afternoon, Mr. Gale. Thank you for your helpful indication. Perhaps it will be helpful at this stage, although we are dealing with amendment No. 28, to say that I intend to go quite wide in speaking to the next group of amendments, which is headed with my amendment No. 1, to obviate a stand part debate on the link, as it is called in these circles.