REGULATIONS (Hansard, 2 May 1984)

§ Mrs. Beckett
I beg to move amendment No. 40, in page 20, line 15 leave out paragraph (a).

Mr. Deputy Speaker
With this it will be convenient to discuss the following amendments:
No. 41, in page 20, line 17 at end insert
501 'other than regulations made under section 36(7)(c)(ii)'. No. 42, in page 20, line 18, leave out paragraph (b).
No. 43, in page 20, line 25, leave out paragraph (c).
No. 44, in page 20, line 30, leave out paragraph (d).
No. 45, in page 20, line 33, leave out paragraph (e).
No. 46, in page 20, line 40, leave out paragraph (f).
No. 47, in page 21, line 1, leave out paragraph (g).
No. 48, in page 21, line 5, leave out paragraph (h).
No. 49, in page 21, line 9, leave out paragraph (j).
No. 50, in page 21, line 11, leave out paragraph (k).
No. 51, in page 21, line 16, leave out paragraph (l).
No. 52, in page 21, line 20, leave out paragraph (m).
No. 53, in page 21, line 25, leave out paragraph (n).
No. 54, in page 21, line 29, leave out paragraph (o).

§ Mrs. Beckett
We are trying to persuade the Minister to do what we failed to get him to do in Committee—to justify why the various regulations should not be sent to the Social Security Advisory Committee.
Amendment No. 40 deals with an exception to which we attach great weight. The regulations refer to full-time education—a difficult and complex matter about which there is much disagreement and confusion. We should be very unhappy if regulations about that were drawn up without reference to the Committee.
I recognise that sometimes regulations drafted after legislation do not have to go to such Committees. It is well within the Committee's remit to decide that regulations drafted under the Bill carry out the intentions of the Bill. The difference is that the Committee will make the decision, rather than the Secretary of State.
I am sure that the Minister will seek to assure the House that the amendments are unnecessary, but I hope that he will accept that in view of the many amendments to the Bill made by the Government and the substantial additions to the clause that we are discussing, there is cause for concern. I hope that he will consider whether more of the regulations should go to the committee.

§ Dr. Boyson
The direct answer is that amendments came to light because of continual consultation. The Occupational Pensions Board and the Social Security Advisory Committee were aware of the provisions in the Bill and passed material to us. The custom of Governments of all colours has been that consultations take place before introducing a Social Security Bill. This Bill provides that for six months after the legislation comes into operation, regulations should not go automatically to the Industrial Injuries Advisory Council, the Social Security Advisory Committee, or to the Occupational Pensions Board because they have already been debated and cleared. I shall check on the consultation on the subject to which amendment No. 41 refers.
This pattern has been followed for some time, and I ask my right hon. and hon. Friends to oppose the amendments, because they could only slow the coming into operation of the Bill. I know that the hon. Lady and the House share the view that franking should be stopped as soon as possible, but if we put this matter out for consultation again, it would only slow matters.

§ Mrs. Beckett
The Minister is on dodgy ground in both his remarks. He said that we had seen evidence of consultation. In two sections of the Bill we have seen 502 evidence of changes being made in the law to bring into effect what everyone had thought was the law, in one case for two years, and in another for several years before that. The Minister mentioned franking and the matters emanating from the Occupational Pensions Board. Again, we have seen evidence that after the Government introduced the Bill, an extremely large new clause and amendments were moved at the end of the Committee stage. Now we have further amendments. It is evidence of sustained consultation; it is also evidence that that consultation should not be brought abruptly to an end, because many changes are needed in the Bill.
On franking, the Minister is on weak ground because,as he will recall, we agreed that it was unnecessary to have legislation. It is just that the pension companies are behaving disgracefully and will not stop until the Government make them. Here again, the timing of the Bill is unimportant. However, I am grateful to the Minister for agreeing to reconsider amendment No. 41.
I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Amendments made:
No. 55, in page 21, line 37, after 'above', insert 'or subsection (4) below'.
No. 56, in page 21, line 45, leave out from 'to' to end of page 22, line 4, and insert
'regulations—

(a) made under section 38 or 44(1A) or (1B) of the Social Security Pensions Act 1975 before the expiry of the period of six months beginning with the commencement of section 14 above;

(b) made under any enactment before the expiry of the period of six months beginning with the commencement of section 14 above and contained in a statutory instrument which states that it contains only provisions consequential on that section or such provisions and regulations made under section 38 or 44(1A) or (1B) of the Social Security Pensions Act 1975;

(c) made under section 41C or 41E of that Act before the expiry of the period of six months beginning with the commencement of Schedule 5 to this Act; or

(d) made under any enactment before the expiry of the period of six months beginning with the commencement of that Schedule and contained in a statutory instrument which states that it contains only provisions consequential on that Schedule or such provisions and regulations made under section 41C or 41E of the Social Security Pensions Act 1975'.—[Mr. Kenneth Clarke.]