I thank both noble Lords for their general support for the regulations and for their support for the work of the PPF and the approach that it has taken, which I am sure is most appreciated. I agree with the noble Lord, Lord Skelmersdale, in that I am not at all sure why we are debating this first; it is quite extraordinary that we are not doing the two pension instruments together.
A number of interesting points were made. I have not seen the article in the Financial Times this morning. I agree with the implication made by the noble Lord, Lord Oakeshott, that there have been quite a few reports recently in the newspapers of companies taking responsible actions and negotiating with their staff to try to deal with the fund deficit as soon as they can. One ought to pay tribute to those companies that have taken a responsible view. I accept the point that he made about smaller businesses, but that should not detract us from bringing the regulations forward to help those businesses for which it would be an important help. It is noticeable that up to 20 or 25 per cent of the organisations that responded to the PPF consultation asked for this action to be taken, so it is pleasing that we are able to do it.
The noble Lord, Lord Skelmersdale, referred to the Catch-22 position when he said that companies have to choose between investment and putting extra money into their pension schemes. I do not deny that companies are faced with some really challenging decisions. I have already referred to the reports of a number of companies that are doing that. Overall, business investment in this country is being done against a background of good performance in general, and I have no doubt that companies will balance the various demands made on them with great care.
I refer to the comment made by the noble Lord, Lord Oakeshott, about overseas companies. My understanding is that the PPF will assess the risk of an overseas parent. Overseas parent companies will have a failure score provided by D&B. Then companies should contact the PFF to provide the failure score and details of country of domicile of the overseas guarantor, from which the PPF will assess the insolvency risk of the guarantor. I hope that that will provide some comfort to the noble Lord. I am grateful for the general support that the Committee has given the regulations.
On Question, Motion agreed to.
Pension Protection Fund (Risk-based Pension Protection Levy) Regulations 2006
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Hunt of Kings Heath
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Thursday, 2 March 2006.
It occurred during Debates on delegated legislation on Pension Protection Fund (Risk-based Pension Protection Levy) Regulations 2006.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
679 c196-7GC 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-22 01:49:25 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_304611
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_304611
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_304611