Pension Schemes Bill

Baroness Bowles of Berkhamsted Excerpts

Thursday 26th March 2026 Lords Chamber

Moved by

[Baroness Bowles of Berkhamsted]

1: Clause 42, page 41, line 39, leave out “or [subsection removed]”
Member’s explanatory statement
This amendment removes a cross-reference to section 26(7B) of the Pensions Act 2008, left out by a report stage amendment in the name of Baroness Bowles of Berkhamsted.

--- Later in debate ---

[Baroness Bowles of Berkhamsted (LD)]

My Lords, I did not expect to be back moving amendments quite so quickly, but despite the 20 consequential amendments that I moved on Report, four more have come to light. They are printed on the Marshalled List. They are entirely consequential on Amendment 52, which deleted mandation. All I seek to do with Amendments 1 to 3 and 8 is to move them formally when the time comes. I beg to move.

[Baroness Hayman (CB)]

My Lords, I will say a word or two at this stage about government Amendment 4, because I understand it relates to Amendment 156, which the Minister moved on Monday. That Amendment 156 had wide Cross-Bench support, coming as it did after an amendment in the other place that was supported across parties and particularly by the Liberal Democrats. It gave the Government the responsibility and ability to issue statutory guidance on the fiduciary duty of trustees in relation to systemic issues, including climate change and many more.

In response to that, the Minister in the Commons said that the Government would bring forward plans to ensure that the guidance reflected the views of all within the sector and that it could be useful to trustees. All I have ever been interested in is bringing forward something that would help those involved with investment decisions for pensioners to be able to take into account with confidence the long-term systemic issues that they found. I am sure the Whip would not want me to repeat their arguments, which I am in danger of doing.

Following the vote on Amendment 156 on Monday, which I still do not understand, I am concerned about what the Government will now do. They are committed to this course of action and have taken a great deal of effort in setting up the technical working group and getting views from across the sector. It would be a real shame if that work were somehow to be halted by the procedural issues of how we get the legislative base to do this.

I should pay tribute here to the Minister and her officials, who moved at great pace and put a lot of effort into coming up with a solution that unfortunately was not accepted by the House on Monday. I would very much appreciate some understanding from the Minister, when she winds up, of how this issue will go forward. Because it was a government amendment, we do not have the opportunity of asking the Commons to think again; it is dead in this House. I would very much value an understanding that the need for this guidance has not gone away. As I understand it, the Government’s commitment to the guidance has not gone away, so it would be very interesting to know how we take the next steps.

--- Later in debate ---

Moved by

[Baroness Bowles of Berkhamsted]

2: Clause 42, page 53, line 20, leave out subsections (16) and (17)
Member’s explanatory statement
This amendment is connected to another amendment in the name of Baroness Bowles of Berkhamsted to the commencement clause.

--- Later in debate ---

Moved by

[Baroness Bowles of Berkhamsted]

3: Clause 137, page 156, line 11, leave out subsection (6)
Member’s explanatory statement
This amendment removes a cross-reference to section 26(7B) of the Pensions Act 2008, left out by a report stage amendment in the name of Baroness Bowles of Berkhamsted.

--- Later in debate ---

Moved by

[Baroness Bowles of Berkhamsted]

8: The Schedule, page 158, line 30, leave out “[section removed]” and insert “28F”
Member’s explanatory statement
This amendment removes a cross-reference to section 28G of the Pensions Act 2008, left out by a report stage amendment in the name of Baroness Bowles of Berkhamsted.