Pension Schemes Bill

Debate between Baroness Scott of Needham Market and Baroness Bowles of Berkhamsted

Committee stage
Tuesday 3rd February 2026 Grand Committee

[The Deputy Chairman of Committees (Baroness Scott of Needham Market) (LD)]

I inform the Committee that if this amendment were to be agreed to, I cannot call Amendment 175A for reasons of pre-emption.

[Baroness Bowles of Berkhamsted (LD)]

My Lords, I support the general issues that the noble Baroness, Lady Noakes, has raised. Of course, if this whole clause were deleted, the amendment that I am seeking in addition would disappear.

I want to speak to my amendment which is about new Section 117D(2), which says:

“The best interests test”, in relation to a unilateral change, is that it is reasonably likely that effecting it will”,


change. I do not like the words “reasonably likely”. We have to examine what “reasonably likely” means in legal terms.

Reasonably likely is a threshold of probability that is lower than the civil standard of “more likely than not”. More likely than not means above 50%, so reasonably likely means less than 50%. Having “reasonably likely” means that lower than 50% might have a better outcome, which is unacceptable. I find it hard to believe that that is what is intended. When you look at a phrase such as “reasonably likely”, you would think that the reasonable is somehow enhancing the likeliness, but in legal terms it is not. It is taking away from it. Therefore, I hope that that can be looked at and that the Government will address that issue.