text_body: --- DIVISION TITLE ---
  
  Public Service Pensions and Judicial Offices Bill - New Clause 8 - Compensation of losses incurred by closure of legacy schemes
  
  --- MOTION EFFECT ---
  
  @ MP voted aye in favour of ministers to require managers of new public service pension schemes not to undertake certain investments due to UK foreign and defence policy.
  
  @ MP voted no against ministers requiring managers of new public service pension schemes not to undertake certain investments due to UK foreign and defence policy.
  
  The majority of MPs voted for ministers to require managers of new public service pension schemes not to undertake certain investments due to UK foreign and defence policy.  
  
  MPs were considering the Public Service Pensions and Judicial Offices Bill.[1][2][3]
  
  The proposed new clause rejected in this Bill was titled: ''Guidance to public service pension scheme managers on investment decisions'' and stated:
  
  :(1) The [https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2013/25/contents/enacted Public Service Pensions Act 2013] is amended in accordance with subsection (2).
  
  :(2) In [https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2013/25/schedule/3/enacted schedule 3], paragraph 12(a), at end insert âincluding guidance or directions on investment decisions which it is not proper for the scheme manager to make in light of UK foreign and defence policyâ.
  
  The rejected new clause was accompanied by the following statement from its proposer:
  
  This new clause would enable the Secretary of State to issue guidance to those authorities that administer public sector pension schemes, including the local government pension scheme, that they may not make investment decisions that conflict with the UKâs foreign and defence policy.
  
  Had it not been rejected the amendment would have amended [https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2013/25/schedule/3/enacted Paragraph 12(a) of schedule 3 to the Public Service Pensions Act 2013]. 
  Section 3 of the Public Service Pensions Act 2013 gave ministers the powers to make regulations they considered appropriate.[4] The schedule gave an indication of types of matter which could be covered by regulations establishing new public sector pension schemes[5]. The presence of a power in the list may be expected to encourage, and perhaps empower, a minister to use it. 
  
  
  
  --
  
  
  * [1] [https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3032 Parliament's webpage on the Public Service Pensions and Judicial Offices Bill], Parliament.uk
  * [2] [https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/58-02/0241/21241v2.pdf Public Service Pensions and Judicial Offices Bill, as amended in Committee, 27 January 2022], Parliament.uk
  * [3] [https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/58-02/0211/en/210211en.pdf Explanatory notes to the Public Service Pensions and Judicial Offices Bill, 7 December 2021], Parliament.uk
  * [4] [https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2013/25/section/3/enacted Section 3 of the Public Service Pensions Act 2013], Legislation.gov.uk
  * [5] [https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2013/25/notes/division/5/13/5 Explanatory notes to Schedule 3 of the Public Service Pensions Act 2013], Legislation.gov.uk
  --- COMMENTS AND NOTES ---
  
  (put thoughts and notes for other researchers here)
  