<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:openSearch="http://a9.com/-/spec/opensearchrss/1.0/">
<channel>
<title>TheyWorkForYou.com Search: edward garnier annuities</title>
<link>https://www.theyworkforyou.com//search/?s=edward+garnier+annuities</link>
<description>Search results for edward garnier annuities at TheyWorkForYou.com</description>
<language>en-gb</language>
<copyright>Parliamentary Copyright.</copyright>
<openSearch:totalResults>11</openSearch:totalResults>
<openSearch:startIndex>1</openSearch:startIndex>
<openSearch:itemsPerPage>20</openSearch:itemsPerPage>
<item>
<title>Bills Presented &#8212; Finance Bill: Cost of Living: Energy and Housing (5 Jun 2014)</title>
<link>https://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2014-06-05c.134.2&amp;s=edward+garnier+annuities#g148.0</link>
<pubDate>Thu, 05 Jun 2014 11:13:00 +0000</pubDate>
<description>Edward Garnier: ...fond: the pensions tax Bill. As a private Member, I introduced—I think in 2004—the Retirement Income Reform Bill, which intended to do away with the need for those at the age of 75 to buy an &lt;b&gt;annuity&lt;/b&gt;. It passed Second Reading on a Friday afternoon, I think by a majority of 101. Unfortunately, the Labour Government crushed it. I hope that the Labour party has changed its mind and will...</description>
</item>
<item>
<title>Amendment of the Law (24 Mar 2014)</title>
<link>https://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2014-03-24b.48.1&amp;s=edward+garnier+annuities#g83.0</link>
<pubDate>Mon, 24 Mar 2014 19:12:00 +0000</pubDate>
<description>Edward Garnier: ...own vehicles to finance their retirement income. I introduced a private Member’s Bill in 2003, entitled the Retirement Income Reform Bill. It was designed to lift the compulsion to purchase an &lt;b&gt;annuity&lt;/b&gt; at the age of 75. The then Government opposed it, but it so happened that I got a majority of more than 100 on that Friday in the spring of 2003. These things happen on Fridays when...</description>
</item>
<item>
<title>Orders of the Day: Pensions Bill (17 Jul 2007)</title>
<link>https://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2007-07-17b.193.1&amp;s=edward+garnier+annuities#g206.2</link>
<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jul 2007 18:15:00 +0000</pubDate>
<description>Edward Garnier: Is there not a further danger in relation to the purchase of &lt;b&gt;annuities&lt;/b&gt;? Recently, compared with previous years, &lt;b&gt;annuities&lt;/b&gt; have been performing pretty poorly. They have not been giving &lt;b&gt;annuity&lt;/b&gt; holders the income that they might have given, say, 15 years ago. Is that not a further concern for those with broken pensions? Are they not also entitled to be concerned about what has happened to their...</description>
</item>
<item>
<title>Orders of the Day &#8212; Pensions Bill: Removal of compulsion to take annuities (16 Nov 2004)</title>
<link>https://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2004-11-16.1220.1&amp;s=edward+garnier+annuities#g1235.2</link>
<pubDate>Tue, 16 Nov 2004 17:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
<description>Edward Garnier: ...in the Department for Work and Pensions or the Treasury, to encourage Ministers, special advisers and civil servants to get to grips with the impoverishment of elderly people through the forced &lt;b&gt;annuity&lt;/b&gt;? Why do the Government not do something about it? They should do it before the election; if they did, they might even just win it.</description>
</item>
<item>
<title>Equitable Life Inquiry (24 Mar 2004)</title>
<link>https://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2004-03-24.976.0&amp;s=edward+garnier+annuities#g1012.1</link>
<pubDate>Wed, 24 Mar 2004 20:06:00 +0000</pubDate>
<description>Edward Garnier: ...of political and economic answers. It is wrong of the Government to say &amp;quot;Penrose has reported: we need do no more.&amp;quot; I believe that this saga points to a need to do away finally with the compulsory &lt;b&gt;annuity&lt;/b&gt; system. The Minister and I debated that at some length last year, and I might remind her that my Retirement Income Reform Bill achieved a Second Reading by a majority of 101—not bad for...</description>
</item>
<item>
<title>Pension Scheme Wind-ups (24 Feb 2004)</title>
<link>https://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2004-02-24.199.1&amp;s=edward+garnier+annuities#g199.4</link>
<pubDate>Tue, 24 Feb 2004 16:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
<description>Edward Garnier: ...not two other related omissions from the Pensions Bill: first, a date set for the publication of the Penrose report; and secondly, a commitment from the Government to do away with the compulsory &lt;b&gt;annuities&lt;/b&gt; rule? Both of those are extremely worrying matters for future and existing pensioners.</description>
</item>
<item>
<title>Bills Presented: Retirement Income Reform (7 Jan 2004)</title>
<link>https://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2004-01-07.260.6&amp;s=edward+garnier+annuities#g260.7</link>
<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2004 11:30:00 +0000</pubDate>
<description>Mr. Adrian Flook, supported by Sir John Butterfill, Mr. David Curry, Mr. Frank Field, Mr. &lt;b&gt;Edward Garnier&lt;/b&gt;, Steve Webb and Mr. Andrew Lansley, presented a Bill to amend the law relating to the provision of retirement income in respect of private and personal pensions, &lt;b&gt;annuities&lt;/b&gt; and defined and additional voluntary contribution pension schemes: And the same was read the First time; and ordered...</description>
</item>
<item>
<title>Public Bill Committee: Retirement Income Reform Bill: Clause 1 - Amendment of the Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 (2 Jul 2003)</title>
<link>https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pbc/2002-03/Retirement_Income_Reform_Bill/01-0_2003-07-02a.3.0?s=edward+garnier+annuities#g4.62</link>
<pubDate>Wed, 02 Jul 2003 15:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
<description>Edward Garnier: ..., the Bill would be destroyed. If the Committee wishes to destroy the Bill, it will support amendment No. 38, which maintains section 634 of the Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1998. It forces &lt;b&gt;annuities&lt;/b&gt; on those who wish to have a private pension, and it does so—as we can see from the list of amendments—at the age of 65 instead of the current age limit of 75. People will have to make...</description>
</item>
<item>
<title>Public Bill Committee: Retirement Income Reform Bill (2 Jul 2003)</title>
<link>https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pbc/2002-03/Retirement_Income_Reform_Bill/01-0_2003-07-02a.1.0?s=edward+garnier+annuities#g2.1</link>
<pubDate>Wed, 02 Jul 2003 14:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
<description>Edward Garnier: ..., who is, I believe, on maternity leave. Parts of the Bill deal with gender neutrality, and I look forward to hearing whether the Government are interested in gender equality in the provision of &lt;b&gt;annuities&lt;/b&gt;. I am reasonably sure that the matter is of interest to all members of the Committee.   I thank members of the Labour party who are not members of the Government for taking part in our...</description>
</item>
<item>
<title>Retirement Income Reform Bill (7 Mar 2003)</title>
<link>https://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2003-03-07.1055.1&amp;s=edward+garnier+annuities#g1072.0</link>
<pubDate>Fri, 07 Mar 2003 10:04:00 +0000</pubDate>
<description>Edward Garnier: ...been listening to him, I am sure that we have all been greatly assisted. Is the short point that he is against choice, whereas I am in favour of choice? The Bill does not require people to buy an &lt;b&gt;annuity&lt;/b&gt; except for the purpose of a minimum income guarantee. They can do what they like with the remainder of their finances. The hon. Gentleman seems to be suggesting that people should not be...</description>
</item>
<item>
<title>Bills Presented: Retirement Income Reform (11 Dec 2002)</title>
<link>https://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2002-12-11.285.2&amp;s=edward+garnier+annuities#g285.3</link>
<pubDate>Wed, 11 Dec 2002 16:13:00 +0000</pubDate>
<description>Mr. &lt;b&gt;Edward Garnier&lt;/b&gt;, supported by Mr. Michael Howard, Mr. David Curry, Mr. Frank Field, Mr. John Butterfill, Mr. Steve Webb, Mr. Richard Allan, Mr. David Willetts and Mr. Charles Hendry, presented a Bill to amend the law relating to the provision of retirement income in respect of private and personal pensions, &lt;b&gt;annuities&lt;/b&gt; and defined and additional voluntary contribution pension schemes: And...</description>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
