Asked by: Lord Myners (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the answer by Baroness Neville-Rolfe on 6 June (HL Deb, col 627), whether they have the necessary power to pursue pension contribution payments from companies where the parent company is based in the Cayman Islands, the British Virgin Islands, or Monaco.
Answered by Baroness Altmann
Each case will need to be considered on its own merits but the Pensions Regulator can use its anti-avoidance powers against targets that are based abroad. Section 303 of the Pensions Act 2004, governing the service of documents abroad, is intended to operate outside the UK jurisdiction The power to enforce any regulatory action against a non-UK company is likely to require the approval or cooperation of the relevant overseas authorities. By and large, these provisions should be enforceable in other EU and Commonwealth jurisdictions.
The Pensions Regulator has demonstrated that it is prepared to use its anti-avoidance powers against targets that are based abroad, as was shown in its handling of the cases involving Sea Containers and the Lehman Brothers group and a complex investigation into the Carrington Wire Defined Benefit Pension Scheme resulted in a £8.5m settlement with two Russian companies.
Asked by: Lord Myners (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the answer by Baroness Neville-Rolfe on 6 June (HL Deb, col 626), on how many occasions since its inception has the Pensions Regulator used provisions for dawn raids, and how it determines the circumstances in which such provisions should be employed.
Answered by Baroness Altmann
The Pensions Regulator has a power to request information which it exercises regularly and successfully. This means that it is often not necessary to use the powers under section 73 (inspection) or section 78 (warrants) of the Pensions Act 2004.
Under section 78, a justice of the peace may issue a warrant where there are reasonable grounds for believing that there are -
or that
This power is only used in extreme circumstances, and such cases usually involve suspicions of wider criminal activity. Since 2004, the Regulator has used its powers to either inspect premises or issue a warrant on five occasions.
Asked by: Lord Myners (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they, the Pensions Regulator, or the Pension Protection Fund have in the last three years had discussions with BHS, Lady Green or Sir Philip Green concerning the deficit in the BHS pension fund and a scheme to reduce that deficit.
Answered by Baroness Altmann
The Pensions Regulator and the Pension Protection Fund are independent bodies and in carrying out their functions they may meet individuals involved with pension schemes.
Ministers have engaged with a range of sponsoring employers of Defined Benefit pensions schemes as a matter of routine, including Sir Philip Green, as part of their normal considerations of the pensions landscape but oversight of the scheme funding regime for Defined Benefit schemes is a matter for the Pensions Regulator. It would not be appropriate for Ministers to intervene in individual cases or to discuss with the Regulator, the Pension Protection Fund or the scheme sponsor how a particular scheme’s pension deficit should be mitigated.
Asked by: Lord Myners (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they will review, or charge others to review, the performance of the trustees of the BHS pension schemes, and whether the current trustees are fit and proper to continue performing that role at BHS and other pension schemes.
Answered by Baroness Altmann
The investigation into the BHS pension schemes, including the role of the trustees, is a matter for the independent Pensions Regulator.
The actions of the trustees and competence of the trustees are among the issues that we would expect the Regulator to be considering as part of its investigations.
Asked by: Lord Myners (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether the BHS pension fund has now transferred to the Pension Protection Fund (PPF) or whether the owner, former owner, or secured creditors are still able to make a financial contribution to obviate a need to transfer the fund to the PPF.
Answered by Baroness Altmann
The BHS pension schemes are in Pension Protection Fund (PPF) assessment periods. During this period the schemes are able to accept contributions from the sponsoring employer to cover its debts to the schemes. They are also able to receive recoveries as a creditor or through the use of the Regulator’s powers. If the scheme assets are shown to be sufficient to buy its members annuities at least as good as the compensation paid by the PPF, the scheme will not transfer into the PPF.
Asked by: Lord Myners (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Altmann on 28 April (HL7905), whether the Pensions Regulator has taken any action in the case of the BHS pension scheme in order to fulfil its statutory duty to reduce the risk of situations that may lead to claims for compensation from the Pension Protection Fund, and what assessment they have made of whether the Pensions Act 2004 provides adequate protection to pension scheme members.
Answered by Baroness Altmann
The investigation into the BHS pension schemes and any associated action is a matter for the independent Pensions Regulator.
Once the Regulator has completed its investigation, any subsequent determination will be published on its website.
The Government considers that the Pensions Act 2004 provides the Regulator with a sufficient range of measures to protect pension scheme members and the Pension Protection Fund, including anti-avoidance powers to enable it to act where corporate transactions are aimed at avoiding debts to the pension scheme. The powers of the Regulator are kept under review.
Asked by: Lord Myners (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they will publish an estimate of the likely impact of the additional levy that will be imposed on well managed and solvent pension schemes in relation to the BHS pension schemes.
Answered by Baroness Altmann
Parliament gave the Pensions Protection Fund independence in how it operates. The PPF sets the pension protection levy at the level it considers necessary to meet its long term funding strategy rather than in direct response to recent claims. Factors relevant to the level of the levy include: the PPF’s existing funding position (£3.6bn in reserves at March 2015); the potential level of future claims; the potential level of assets that may be received from transferred schemes; and expected future investment returns.
Asked by: Lord Myners (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they will order an inquiry into actions taken by the trustees of the BHS pension schemes in agreeing revisions to funding rates and supporting the sale of the employer.
Answered by Baroness Altmann
The Pensions Regulator regulates work-based pension schemes, including trust-based schemes. In accordance with Parliament’s wishes, it has operational independence so it would be entirely inappropriate for Ministers to intervene in its decisions or on-going investigations.
Asked by: Lord Myners (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they will review decisions taken by the Pensions Regulator in connection with the BHS pension schemes.
Answered by Baroness Altmann
In accordance with Parliament’s wishes, the Regulator has operational independence. Whilst performance against its key targets is regularly reviewed by the Department, this does not encompass its regulatory decision-making or the conduct of its investigations. It would be entirely inappropriate and improper for Ministers to comment on or intervene in these areas.
Asked by: Lord Myners (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether the Pensions Regulator will appoint an investment bank and retail consultancy to support its investigation into the events preceding BHS going into administration.
Answered by Baroness Altmann
Parliament gave the Pensions Regulator independence in how it operates. It is for the Regulator to determine how it wishes to undertake any investigation into matters relating to the BHS pension scheme.