Pension Schemes Bill — Clause 123 — Funding of Defined Benefit Schemes — 16 Nov 2020 at 21:03

The majority of MPs voted not to place a set of requirements on ministers making regulations and taking certain other actions in relation to pensions, including instructing them to ensure the closure of certain schemes is not accelerated and to maintain affordability for both employees and employers.

MPs were considering the Pension Schemes Bill[1].

The amendment rejected in this vote was:

  • Amendment 1, page 117, line 34, at end insert—
  • ‘(2) In exercising any powers to make regulations, or otherwise to prescribe any matter or principle, under Part 3 of the Pensions Act 2004 (scheme funding) as amended by Schedule 10, the Secretary of State must ensure that—
  • (a) schemes that are expected to remain open to new members, either indefinitely or for a significant period of time, are treated differently from schemes that are not;
  • (b) scheme liquidity is balanced with scheme maturity;
  • (c) there is a correlation between appropriate investment risk and scheme maturity;
  • (d) affordability of contributions to employers is maintained;
  • (e) affordability of contributions to members is maintained;
  • (f) the closure of schemes that are expected to remain open to new members, either indefinitely or for a significant period of time, is not accelerated; and
  • (g) trustees retain sufficient discretion to be able to comply with their duty to act in the best interests of their beneficiaries.”

The rejected amendment was accompanied by the following explanatory statement from its proposer:

  • This amendment seeks to ensure that open and active schemes which are receiving regular, significant cash contributions and closed schemes are treated differently, in accordance with their differing liquidity profile.

The motion rejected in this vote was:

  • That the amendment be made.

--

Debate in Parliament |

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 are Boths? An MP can vote both aye and no in the same division. The boths page explains this.

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

PartyMajority (No)Minority (Aye)BothTurnout
Alliance0 10100.0%
Con349 (+2 tell) 0096.4%
DUP5 0062.5%
Green0 10100.0%
Independent1 40100.0%
Lab0 189094.5%
LDem0 9 (+2 tell)0100.0%
PC0 30100.0%
SDLP0 20100.0%
SNP0 470100.0%
Total:355 256095.8%

Rebel Voters - sorted by vote

MPs 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 MP who could have voted in this division

Sort by: Name | Constituency | Party | Vote

NameConstituencyPartyVote
no rebellions

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