Pensions Bill — Lords Amendment — 18 Nov 2004 at 13:34

359 Before Clause 229, insert the following new Clause- "Removal of compulsion to take annuities Notwithstanding any statutory provision or rule of law to the contrary, the requirement for pensioners to take their pension in the form of an annuity, together with the requirement to do so by the age of 75, shall cease to have effect, provided that the pensioner can demonstrate that he has resources to ensure that he will not become dependent on means-tested benefits."

359A The Commons disagree to this amendment for the following reason-

Because it would alter the area of taxation, and the Commons do not offer any further reason, trusting that this reason may be deemed sufficient.

359B The Lords do not insist on its Amendment No. 359, to which the Commons have disagreed for their reason numbered 359A, but do propose the following Amendment No. 359B in lieu thereof-

Insert the following new Clause- "Amendment of rules to take pension annuities by the age of 75 Any statutory provision or rule of law requiring a pension to be taken in the form of an annuity by the age of 75 shall be amended so that the age limit is 85."

359C The Commons disagree to this amendment for the following reason-

Because it would alter the area of taxation, and the Commons do not offer any further reason, trusting that this reason may be deemed sufficient.

rose to move Amendment No. 359D, as an amendment to the Motion that the House do not insist on its Amendment No. 359B, to which the Commons have disagreed for their reason numbered 359C, at end insert "but do propose Amendment No. 359E in lieu thereof-

359E Insert the following new Clause- "Amendment of rules to take pension annuities by the age of 75

Any statutory provision or rule of law requiring a pension to be taken in the form of an annuity by the age of 75 shall be amended so that the age limit is 80."

On Question, Whether the said amendment (No. 359E) shall be agreed to?

Their Lordships divided: Contents, 96; Not-Contents, 119.

Debate in Parliament | Historical Hansard | Source |

Public Whip is run as a free not-for-profit free service. If you'd like to support us, please consider switching your electricity and/or gas to Bulb Energy who provide 100% renewable electricity and tend to be 20% cheaper than the 'Big Six'. They'll also pay any exit fees (up to £120) from your old supplier AND give you (and us) a £50 credit for joining up via our Bulb Referral Link.

Party Summary

Votes by party, red entries are votes against the majority for that party.

What is Tell? '+1 tell' means that in addition one member of that party was a teller for that division lobby.

What is Turnout? This is measured against the total membership of the party at the time of the vote.

PartyMajority (Not-Content)Minority (Content)Turnout
Con0 45 (+1 tell)22.2%
Crossbench8 1312.0%
Green0 1100.0%
Lab109 (+2 tell) 055.0%
LDem0 35 (+1 tell)52.2%
Total:117 9432.9%

Rebel Voters - sorted by party

Lords for which their vote in this division differed from the majority vote of their party. You can see all votes in this division, or every eligible lord who could have voted in this division

Sort by: Name | Party | Vote

NamePartyVote
Viscount Bledisloe Crossbenchno
Lord Chorley Crossbenchno
Baroness Howarth of BrecklandCrossbench (front bench)no
Lord Laming Crossbench (front bench)no
The Earl of ListowelCrossbench (front bench)no
Lord Palmer Crossbench (front bench)no
Lord Tanlaw Crossbenchno
Viscount Tenby Crossbenchno

About the Project

The Public Whip is a not-for-profit, open source website created in 2003 by Francis Irving and Julian Todd and now run by Bairwell Ltd.

PublicWhip v2 codebase is currently under development - you can join the Slack group to find out more or email [email protected]

The Whip on the Web

Help keep PublicWhip alive