Steve Darling
MP for Torbay · Liberal Democrat · United Kingdom
“Many people may be planning to visit the English riviera this summer, and when they do they may venture on to our coasts. I hope that the Minister will ensure that common sense prevails in appropriately recompensing our coastguards, who put themselves in danger’s way to support people in tragic circumstances.”
“Together with the Heart Campaign in Torbay, I am campaigning hard to protect those services and get investment. Like others, I believe that there is a lack of acknowledgment of our frail elderly population in Devon, where the finances are not following that particular challenge.”
“It is poignant that we are having the Sir David Amess debate today, particularly in the light of the shocking murder of Ann Widdecombe only a week ago. Ann was a Devon resident, and although I may not have seen eye to eye with her politically, she definitely brought authenticity into politics in spades.”
“This could be worse for Torbay unitary authority. However, it is a catastrophic carve-up for Devon, led by Exeter and Plymouth—both Labour councils—and driven forward by a Labour Minister, which will result in a rural rump in Devon. Can the Minister please advise us on his belief as to the financial viability of this rural rump of Devon?”
“Torbay hospital is the third oldest estate that celebrates being part of the NHS. In heatwave conditions, the tower block is like an oven and that has a massive impact on patients, staff and even equipment.”
“Torbay council is the most deprived local authority in the south-west of England. I would welcome the Minister’s assurances that rearranging the deckchairs with this local reorganisation will not detract from regeneration, which is a core driver for that local authority. The new Prime Minister is set to move No.”
The complete record
Every one of 600 lines we hold for Steve Darling, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 5 of 12.
“The police in Torbay tell me that in Paignton and Torquay town centres a number of habitual offenders see a call back to prison as just a professional risk. Does my hon. Friend agree that after years of a lack of investment by the Conservatives, we need to see investment in rehabilitation to help keep those individuals on the straight and narrow?”
“Professional standards set the tone and the culture for the whole organisation. I pay tribute to Roy Linden, who is the commander of South Devon police, the old F division. There is a significant challenge relating to the lack of knowledge within the police. There are lots of new officers, and if we do not have the professional standards holding people to account, police often fall short of the standards that many of us would expect of them.”
“I alluded to the fact that we have sadly lost an awful lot of police officers with deep knowledge, and many of our police officers are relatively new to the position. Will the Minister reflect on how we can build that long-term knowledge back into the police force, because that can drive better standards where services are being provided, rather than looking for where things have already fallen over?”
“The Liberal Democrats welcome the direction of travel. As the shadow Minister identified, the industry has demanded some elements of the clauses, but they are mostly about supporting consumers. The end users of these services should be a key element of what the Bill is about.”
“To stop this, we need to take some inspiration from Ireland, where there are limits of 10% increases and surge pricing is banned in both primary and secondary markets. We need to allow true fans to sell on the tickets they are no longer able to take advantage of, but limit the additional handling fees to a reasonable level and ban surging. Concerts are an outstanding way of enhancing one’s sense of wellbeing, relaxing and, probably most importantly, developing a sense of community. However, we need to ensure that people are protected when buying tickets, because we all need a bit of light relief in the challenging world that we all live in now.”
“Taxi drivers and those in the hospitality industry told me that the bay was buzzing, and that it was better than a bank holiday weekend. However, there are opportunities for ticket touts to come into play for these types of festivals. One of my staff was impacted by ticket touting on Ticketmaster for the Oasis concert—there is no accounting for taste—which the hon. Member for Warwick and Leamington mentioned. He spent hours online and saw the ticket go from £135 to more than £300—the surge pricing that we believe is wicked. On the secondary market, we saw that same ticket go up to £6,000. It is utterly shameful. I am aware that Ticketmaster sometimes labels tickets as if they are platinum when they are actually the same as standard tickets. Regulation is needed in these areas.”
“Concerts are an extremely enriching part of our lives. In my youth, I may have gone to a Deep Purple or AC/DC concert, but my guilty pleasure was going to “Abba Voyage” not that long ago. This is my only pun: we are seeing dirty deeds done not so dirt cheap to our consumers. Surge pricing and hidden costs are absolutely shameful. Concerts are a way of driving tourism. I would not have gone to Leipzig a couple of years ago had it not been one of the few venues that I could easily get to to see one of my favourite bands, Goran Bregović and his Wedding and Funeral Orchestra. In my constituency of Torbay we have Electric Bay, an outstanding festival that was headlined by Fatboy Slim this summer on the Saturday night.”
“It is perverse that those who are poorest have to pay more because they are least able to jump in a car, and very often do not own a car, so have little choice but to use the Tesco Metro, or a similar shop, in the town centre. I would like some reflections from the Minister on that. We also heard about e-bikes. It would be welcome to hear the Minister talk about regulations around e-bikes. The problem is not just e-bikes catching fire but the irresponsible ownership of them, and the fact that there is no age limit on their ownership. I spoke to a police officer earlier this week, and that was one of the challenges she faced. In addition, often those using e-bikes are up to no good, so greater regulation around e-bikes and some words from the Minister would be extremely welcome. I will move on to the main meat of my speech.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Dame Siobhain. I congratulate the hon. Member for Warwick and Leamington (Matt Western) on securing this important debate. What we have heard from hon. Members has been extremely wide-ranging. I will focus the vast majority of my speech on ticket touting and scalping. However, I want to reflect on what we have heard from hon. Members on shrinkflation and on how important it is to allow the public to understand the true price of goods. I look forward to hearing from the Minister on that, and also on the challenge of the Tesco Metro in the town centre having significantly higher prices than the out-of-town supermarkets. That is a significant issue in my constituency of Torbay.”
“We are keen to get on the public record what he says in this area, because we know from conversations with the industry that there is some interest in the matter.”
“I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time. New clause 2 is about market consolidation, and ensuring that the Minister undertakes to report back so we can see how it is progressing. Clearly, market consolidation will have positive impacts, but there is a law of unforeseen consequences, so it is important to ensure that there is a regular health check on what is happening in the market. It is not only about that law of unintended consequences, but about checking out the opportunity for new entrants to come into the system, and making sure that there are no unexpected barriers. To our mind, it is good practice that one would hope would be undertaken. The new clause is a probing amendment; we will not be pressing it to a vote, but I look forward to reassurances from the Minister.”
“(3) In preparing the report, the Secretary of State must consult— (a) the Pensions Regulator, (b) the Financial Conduct Authority, (c) representatives of pension scheme trustees, members, and sponsoring employers, and (d) such other experts or bodies as the Secretary of State considers appropriate. (4) The Secretary of State must lay a copy of the report before both Houses of Parliament.”— (Steve Darling.) This new clause requires the Secretary of State to report on whether the fiduciary duties of trustees of occupational pension schemes should be amended to permit discretionary indexation of pre-1997 accrued rights, where scheme funding allows. Brought up, and read the First time.”
“(2) The report must consider— (a) the impact of current fiduciary obligations on trustees’ ability to award discretionary increases to pre-1997 pension benefits; (b) the potential benefits of permitting such discretionary indexation for affected pensioners; (c) the funding conditions and thresholds under which discretionary indexation could be considered sustainable; (d) the appropriate level of regulatory oversight and guidance required to ensure that discretionary increases are granted in a fair, transparent, and financially responsible manner; (e) international approaches to indexation of legacy pension benefits; (f) the legal and actuarial implications of amending fiduciary duties in this context.”
“I thank the Minister for putting his thoughts on the record. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the motion. Clause, by leave, withdrawn. New Clause 5 Report on fiduciary duty and discretionary indexation of pre-1997 benefits “(1) The Secretary of State must, within 12 months of the passing of this Act, publish a report on whether the fiduciary duties of trustees of occupational pension schemes should be amended to permit discretionary indexation of pre-1997 accrued rights, where scheme funding allows.”
“As Liberal Democrats, we sympathise with the aims, but we feel that we need to have confidence that the system has the capacity to pay out. Our proposal is a steady hand on the tiller approach. It is about sense checking and ensuring that there is an ability to support the appropriate levels of indexation. I hope that the Minister will look kindly upon the proposal, as it is the more level-headed approach, with all due respect to Plaid and the SNP.”
“[ Interruption. ] I am not quite used to getting interrupted by thunder. Perhaps I should get used to it, with Jennie winning Westminster Dog of the Year, or at least the popular vote. Clearly, it was rigged—I jest. On a more serious note, we are looking at a cohort of pensioners, the pre-’97 pensioners, who have been left behind without indexation. We heard moving evidence from two gentlemen who shared the challenges that many of those pensioners face, living in higher levels of poverty because of the failure to index. Our proposal is to ensure that there is a responsibility to explore the possibility of amending the fiduciary duties—something I was not even aware of until I started exploring the Bill—to support the possibility of indexation. I am aware that a more prescriptive new clause has also been tabled.”
“Equally, historically, pensions may not have taken account of how people’s lives might have become more complicated, such as with partners and the way that life moves on. We ask the Minister to reflect on that, and see how he may be able to tackle this injustice. I apologise for leaving before we complete the debate on the new clause, Ms Lewell.”
“I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time. I am afraid I have a difficulty, Ms Lewell: I am appearing soon in a Westminster Hall debate as a spokesperson, so I will have to go part-way through this debate—accept my sincere apologies for that. New clause 7 is the beginning of a series of new clauses on pensions injustices. It is intended to probe. I know from fellow MPs that there are significant amounts of casework about people who fall short of being acknowledged as receiving benefits from pensions, such as spouses or partners of different descriptions. Our world is complicated. I am adopted, and went from having one sibling to nine siblings in total; I have a complicated family. We all have complicated families.”
“I understand that Ukraine holds approximately €190 billion in frozen Russian assets. Press reports today suggest that there is a level of flexibility in the stance on releasing them, as long as there are some legal guarantees from the European Union around the risks that may be faced. Are the Government supporting the European Union to unlock this opportunity, which could help to support efforts in Ukraine?”
“In Torbay, which is sadly one of the most deprived constituencies in the south-west of England, bus travel is the primary form of public transport. The £2 price cap was valued by young people and by those of working age in navigating Torbay. Does my hon. Friend agree that its reinstatement would help oil the wheels of our communities, such as Torbay?”
“As the Liberal Democrat spokesperson, I echo that this is a direction of travel that we welcome. The vast majority of the proposals that are before us today are uncontentious. They follow the correct direction of travel in growth and change that we want to see in our pensions system in the United Kingdom. Question put and agreed to. Clause 27 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 28 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 29 Further provision about contents of small pots regulations”
“As Liberal Democrats, one of the key lenses through which we look at the legislation is: how does it simplify the world for those who are not the most financially literate savers into their pensions? As Liberal Democrats, we strongly support the “pot follows member” approach, as it would simplify matters for people. It would ensure a clearer mechanism for savers to be aware of the level of their pension as their life moves on, and allow investments to be drawn together more easily. It would be interesting to hear the Minister’s reflections on that, and on why the Australian model is unsuitable for the United Kingdom.”
“We therefore continue to have grave concerns around mandation, and look forward to hearing what assurances the Minister is able to give. The key outcome for us is making sure that there is a stable pensions system in which people can have confidence, because confidence is crucial for driving the positive investment that I am sure everybody in this room wants to see.”
“We have no issue with the technical amendments. However, for us the crucial issue in the Bill is driving an environment of positive investment, and a system in the United Kingdom that individual investors—as in, would-be pensioners—can believe in. The mandation element causes concern. As has been alluded to, there are assumptions that Ministers are reasonable people; however, we do not have to look that far across the Atlantic ocean to see politicians behaving unreasonably. It concerns us as Liberal Democrats that giving powers in the Bill without clear management of them is potentially a step too far. While the Minister, and other Ministers in the current Government, may be reasonable, who knows what is coming down the line in a very turbulent political system?”
“Would the Minister be kind enough to reflect on a situation currently at play in the market, whereby Phoenix Group is withdrawing the management of billions of pounds from Aberdeen Group? These master products offer opportunities that could significantly impact on viability. Could the Minister reflect on that?”
“Reflecting on events over the weekend, may I congratulate the Minister on being one of the few who remained in post? There is talk of the Prime Minister using all levers of power to drive forward work on certain wicked issues. One of the big wicked issues is the lack of affordable housing. In my constituency of Torbay, only 8% of our housing stock is social-rented, compared with a national average of 17%. I encourage the Minister to reflect again on this and take the opportunity of new clause 4—surely socialists should vote for clause 4. This is another opportunity to apply all the pressure we can to drive more social-rented housing, to support our communities and those most in need in society.”
“I echo what the shadow Minister has just highlighted. We all want the reform that the Bill introduces, but we do not want what results from this process to be set up forever, with a lack of opportunity for change; I will talk a little further about that when we come to new clause 3. Some reassurance from the Minister that there is an opportunity for new entrants and innovation would be extremely welcome.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Turner. Will the Minister put a little more flesh on the bone in respect of the ladder of opportunity for new entrants? We need to make sure that we do not end up with a system with large schemes and nobody being able to get into the super-league of opportunity that we have currently. We want to see innovation over time and hoped that, through the new clause, we could bake that into the system. We can have aspirations for how future Ministers deal with these matters, but we must give confidence to the industry in respect of future entrants, so that it continues to be a vibrant industry that drives investment and growth for people’s pensions. That is essential. We would be extremely grateful for some more flesh on the bone.”
“It also requires a whole of market assessment to ensure the best solutions are chosen for members. It is a privilege to move the amendment, because as Liberal Democrats we want to make sure that pensioners are at the heart of the Bill, as do many colleagues of different parties in this room, I am sure. For us, it is about driving a positive culture of engagement. The expectations that these proposals would place on managers or trustees would drive a positive engagement culture, as well as putting guardrails and protections around investments. I would welcome the Minister’s reflections on how the Bill would tackle our aspiration for the positive engagement culture that I am sure all Members in the room wish to see achieved through the Bill.”
“I beg to move amendment 279, in clause 42, page 55, line 40, at end insert— “(4A) The trustees or managers of a relevant scheme, in determining whether to adopt or vary a default pension benefit solution, must— (a) issue a written notice of the proposal to all members of the scheme, including— (i) the expected impact on benefits and investment strategy, and (ii) a written attestation that a market-wide assessment of all available options was undertaken; (b) ensure a consultation period of at least 60 days has elapsed; (c) confirm that fewer than 10 per cent of eligible members have objected in writing.” This amendment adds the “without member opposition” safeguard to defined contribution schemes when changes to default pension benefit solutions are considered.”
“Amendment 154, in clause 42, page 56, line 16, leave out “established under a trust”. This amendment amends the definition of “relevant scheme” so schemes that are not established under a trust may fall within the definition. Amendment 155, in clause 42, page 56, line 25, at beginning insert “(1)(b) or”.— (Torsten Bell.) This amendment provides for negative parliamentary procedure for regulations that prescribe when or in what circumstances default pension benefit solutions need to be reviewed. Clause 42, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 43 Transferable members”
“I thank the Minister for his positive feedback. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. Amendments made: 152, in clause 42, page 56, line 1, leave out “are to assess the needs and interests of its” and insert “of a scheme are to assess the needs and interests of the scheme’s”. This amendment corrects a minor verbal inconsistency. Amendment 153, in clause 42, page 56, line 14, leave out “money purchase benefits” and insert “benefits falling within paragraph (a) of the definition of ‘money purchase benefits’ in section 181(1) of the Pension Schemes Act 1993”. This amendment restricts the definition of “eligible member” of a relevant scheme so that it does not include members who are accruing or entitled to collective money purchase benefits.”
“I am sure that the Minister, as a fellow Devon MP, will be only too well aware of our thriving high-tech cluster and the support it provides to the defence industry from its base in Torbay. What assurance can the Minister give our high-tech cluster in Torbay that it will be taken account of as this strategy develops, so that it can play its part in supporting our nation’s defence?”
“In Torbay, we have almost 50% more people who rent in the private sector than the national average. While the vast majority of landlords are good landlords, sadly there are some rotten apples out there. Pushing against Lords amendment 26 is essential, because we need to ensure that local authorities have the powers to hold these landlords to account. I hope my hon. Friend agrees.”
“When I visit teachers in Torbay secondary schools, I reflect on how there is often a bay mentality and a lack of aspiration for youngsters. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that often in our local coastal communities there is a lack of aspiration compared with many metropolitan areas, where there is greater richness of culture and opportunity for our young people?”
“I am concerned about the Getting It Right First Time NHS template that the health service applies to our health services in Devon and Cornwall. It is a system that is very much drawn from the metropolitan experience of health provision and does not account for sparsity and the fact that we have seas either side of us. Can the Minister assure us that Getting It Right First Time will take account of places where there is rurality and coastal impact on our health services?”
“However, for us it is about making sure that we keep local links to communities, and driving positive change through that investment in our local communities is absolutely essential. I look forward to the debates over the next few weeks.”
“As the Liberal Democrat spokesperson, and echoing the hon. Member for Wyre Forest, I broadly welcome the thrust of the Bill. We heard in evidence that a lot of the industry is playing catch-up and is about 15 years behind those who are best in class. As Liberal Democrats, we are keen to make sure that we are supporting particularly those who are more challenged in being able to save or to make the right decisions, and that we use what levers we can to tackle issues such as climate change and cleaning up our environment. We look forward to working with colleagues on this Committee. On the local government pension schemes and the pots, we welcome the direction of travel.”
“Clearly, investors would want to invest in the local area to drive economic development, but there is a need to balance that with getting positive outcomes for the pension fund. Some guidance from the Minister on how he sees that balance being struck, as the hon. Members for Wyre Forest and for Mid Leicestershire have alluded to, would be helpful.”
“I start by wishing the Minister a happy birthday. [Hon. Members: “Hear, Hear.”] I am sure that for all of his life he has wanted to be sitting on a pensions Bill Committee on his birthday. More seriously, when we were in desperate measures in my time as a local authority councillor in Torbay, we borrowed to invest and make money for the local authority—that was once upon a time, because it is no longer possible—so I know from experience that authorities often have to invest elsewhere in the country to get the best financial returns. Our experience in Torbay was that a lot of our investments in the south of England got in the money that we needed to keep the local authority ticking over. I would therefore welcome the Minister’s thoughts on how we get the balance right.”
“The Minister spoke of a couple of opportunities for regulation in this area, and we heard oral evidence about how an awful lot of this Bill is to be drawn out in secondary legislation. Will he give us timelines for when he plans to share the regulations, or at least begin the consultation on them, and say what he sees as the key elements of those regulations that will break cover in due course? Question put and agreed to. Clause 2, as amended, accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill.”
“I very much echo what the hon. Member for Wyre Forest said. Clearly, surpluses have built up over a number of years since the last crash. There has been a level of overcaution. It is important for our economy that those surpluses are appropriately released, which could drive economic growth. I am sure that all of us in the room want to see that.”
“I rise to speak in respect of amendments 265 and 267, which echo the issues already covered by the shadow Minister. Allowing 60 days’ notice to scheme members is extremely important to the Liberal Democrats—and, to be fair, I am sure it is also important to the Government—and the central intention is to protect outcomes for members of schemes and ensure that there is enough flexibility. That 60 days’ notice is really important to us. Ensuring that there is enough money in the scheme for any buy-out is the second element, which the hon. Member for Wyre Forest has already alluded to. We think it is very important that the finances are there and that we put scheme members at the centre of the proposals before us. I look forward to hearing from the Minister what reassurance he is able to give us on those points.”
“Can the Minister give us some timescales? I asked previously about timescales, regulations and secondary legislation. I would be grateful if the Minister could address that.”
“For people for whom the financial world is a complete challenge—and even for many of us in this room, getting our head around it totally is a bit of a challenge—it is essential that we use every possible lever to make sure that quality advice is available. As Liberal Democrats, we will unashamedly use every opportunity in the Bill to provide high levels of education for those who are in receipt of pensions and to give them as much wind in their sails as possible.”
“I should start by saying that I do not recognise the purist approach that we have heard from the hon. Member for Aberdeen North. This is an issue close to my heart, because my father, having seen the poverty that his father was in, saved significantly in his private pension scheme as a lorry driver. Sadly, however, he was extremely poorly advised, and as he approached retirement he put thousands and thousands of pounds into equities; then, in the late 1980s, there was a stock market crash. He might as well have burned half of his money. The further we drive the health of the pension industry, the better, and particularly knowledge for those who may not be very much in the financial world. We heard in evidence from NEST that only 40% of people have even registered online to know what their pension is doing.”
“I beg to move amendment 264, in clause 9, page 9, line 4, at end insert— “(e) Where regulations under subsection (2A) lower the funding threshold for a surplus payment to below the full buy-out funding level, the Secretary of State must— (i) conduct an assessment setting out— (A) prescribed stress scenarios and their impact on funding, (B) a maximum permissible extraction percentage for each scenario, and (C) contingencies to restore funding; (ii) consult the Pensions Regulator, the FCA, and such actuarial bodies as may be prescribed; and (iii) lay a report of the assessment before Parliament.” This amendment requires the Secretary of State to conduct an assessment when the DWP calibrates any extraction threshold below buy-out.”
“Amendment 264 would provide a backstop and a check where there are potential extractions and buy-outs. It would give an opportunity for the Secretary of State to cast an eye over the process when the DWP does an assessment. It goes back to safeguarding: as I am sure this Committee will discuss repeatedly, we need to ensure that we have investors’ and beneficiaries’ best interests at heart. I hope that the Secretary of State will take the proposal at face value, as an appropriate guardrail, and I look forward to its endorsement.”
“I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn . Amendment proposed : 258, in clause 9, page 9, line 21, leave out “in subsection (2A), after ‘section’ insert ‘37(2A),’” and insert “in subsection (2), after ‘virtue of’ insert ‘(za) section 37(2A)’”.— (Mark Garnier.) This amendment would make all regulations on DB surplus extraction subject to the affirmative procedure all times they were made rather than just after first use. Question put, That the amendment be made.”
“I beg to move amendment 269, in clause 10, page 10, line 10, at end insert— “(aa) make, publish and keep under review the consistency of— (i) regulated VFM schemes, or (ii) regulated VFM arrangements, with the goals of the Paris Agreement on climate change and clean energy;”. This amendment, with Amendment 270, would require pension funds and managers to show whether their portfolio investments are consistent with the Paris Agreement.”