Pension Schemes Bill (First sitting)

Callum Anderson Excerpts

Committee stage
Tuesday 2nd September 2025 Public Bill Committees

[Callum Anderson (Buckingham and Bletchley) (Lab)]

Q I have a short question about scale tests. Both organisations have reflected a concern that the drive to consolidating may be undermining smaller schemes. How can we ensure that there are sufficient reassurances in the Bill that support better transition pathway rules?

Zoe Alexander: I am pleased to talk on this point. We are supportive of consolidation and we absolutely see the benefits of scale, but we are concerned that there are a very small number of very high value schemes in the market that are already adversely affected by the presence of the scale provisions in the Bill. EBCs are not sending business their way because they are under £25 billion or cannot necessarily show those that they are on a path to that number. It is really critical that the transition pathway is in place as early as it possibly can be, and also that EBCs are encouraged to understand the way that the market dynamics will work here. What we do not want is for really high-value schemes that are delivering great investment returns, that are really innovative and that may be investing very heavily in the UK to fail simply because of the scale test. We want those schemes to provide and to grow, in the interests of members.

Rob Yuille: I agree with that, but I would like to make a wider, related point about the route to 2030 and the importance of getting the sequencing right for—

[The Chair]

Order. That brings us to the end of time allotted for the Committee to ask questions. On behalf of the Committee, I thank our witnesses for their evidence. I apologise for having had to cut you off.

Examination of Witnesses

Patrick Coyne and Charlotte Clark gave evidence.