Clause 36
Pensions Bill
4:30 pm
Paul Rowen (Shadow Minister, Work & Pensions; Rochdale, Liberal Democrat)
I hope that the Minister can give us some indication of why the word used is “may” and not “must”. We all accept that the compliance regime has to have a light touch and to be fair. The impact assessment sets out the three clear areas in which the regime has to meet standards.
The other side of the coin is missing, however, although I accept that this will not happen in the vast majority of cases. I am sure—we have seen the figures—that most employers will operate the scheme without problems. However, there will be a small number of employers with whom there are problems, and the compliance regime is meant to deal with that. Equally, there might be compelling reasons why that employer has not met his or her obligations, so allowing him or her the right to a tribunal is the appropriate way forward.
I hope that the Minister can respond favourably. Given the consensus that has been developed so far, the slight change from a three-letter word to a four-letter word might help to get more widespread support for the measures in the Bill.