Enterprise Bill [HL]

Lord Borwick Excerpts

Wednesday 4th November 2015 Grand Committee

Moved by

[Lord Borwick]

53ZJ: Clause 26, page 44, line 8, leave out from “of” to “does” in line 10 and insert “a relevant public sector exit”

[Lord Borwick (Con)]

My Lords, this amendment does not try to amend the purpose of Clause 26; rather, it would change an ambiguity in the final line of new Section 153A(1) inserted by Clause 26, where the qualifier,

“any period of 28 consecutive days”,

could be said to refer to payments rather than to exits. It might be possible for a generous employer to pay £95,000 every month, which I presume is not the intention of the clause. My amendment would change the wording so that it would clearly refer only to the exits and ensure that duplication of payments could not be made.

[Baroness Neville-Rolfe]

I thank my noble friend Lord Borwick for his support for the cap and for his interest in helping us to ensure that the provisions that implement it are clear and understandable to those who will be affected. To cut the cackle, I am happy to accept his amendment.

--- Later in debate ---

Moved by

[Lord Borwick]

54BC: Clause 26, page 44, line 9, at end insert—
“(1A) Where provision is made under subsection (1) it must also secure that if, in any period of 28 consecutive days, two or more relevant public sector exits occur in respect of the same person, the total amount of exit payments made to the person in respect of those exits does not exceed the amount provided for in subsection (1).”

--- Later in debate ---

Moved by

[Lord Borwick]

54CA: Clause 26, page 44, line 33, leave out “(1)” and insert “(1A)”