My Lords, I am grateful for the comments of the noble Lord, Lord Oakeshott, and the noble Baroness, Lady Turner. The reason that the words ““treated as made”” are in the amendment is so that it covers public sector pensions, where the money does not actually get transferred anywhere. It sits in a notional hole and gets paid out at the end of the employment.
As for the Employment Rights Act 1996, by law the Minister is quite right. You have to have net and gross income put on the monthly, or even weekly, pay sheet. You have to put the deductions, first for tax and, secondly, for national insurance but, as far as I know, for none other purpose. If I am right, there is a very good reason for putting pension contributions on the pay sheet. I will not pursue the argument tonight. However, I would like to talk privately, perhaps to one of the Minister’s advisers, about this, as transparency on a weekly or monthly basis is very important. It will help to achieve what we are all trying to do, which is to set up a sensible pension scheme, especially for the lower paid.
Pensions Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Skelmersdale
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 4 July 2007.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Pensions Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
693 c1123-4 
Session
2006-07
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 12:34:30 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_408147
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_408147
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_408147