I am grateful to the Minister for that clarification and I certainly was not intending to misquote what he was saying. However, there seems to be a difference between the active consideration of mergers and the more passive position from the Government in that determination “may” be governed by the influence of the market rather than through what we are saying in this amendment. Again, it is absolutely crucial to us on this side of the House—whether it be on governance, transparency or the way in which duties are imposed on trustees—that while being mindful of previous situations regarding pensions and difficulties in the market, we are always looking to get best value and protect the interests of the public throughout this process. However, in the light of the comments that the Minister has made and the opportunity for further consideration at a later stage, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Pension Schemes Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Bradley
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 7 January 2015.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Pension Schemes Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
758 c393 
Session
2014-15
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2015-05-22 08:46:37 +0100
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2015-01-07/15010777000068
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2015-01-07/15010777000068
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2015-01-07/15010777000068