division_name: Pensions Bill
motion: <p class="" pid=".761.3/1" pwmotiontext="yes">I beg to move, That the Bill be now read a Second time.</p>
  
  <p class="" pid=".761.3/2" pwmotiontext="yes">The Bill is an important step forward in security and confidence in pensions. It strengthens protection and strengthens regulation. It cuts complexity in the system, making it easier for firms to run pensions and helping to cut costs. It will increase choices for people over the timing and pace of their retirement. It reflects the extensive consultation that we have undertaken. Those are all crucial building blocks for confidence in pensions, rebuilding the pensions partnership for the 21st century. The Bill will, I hope, command widespread support in the House.</p>
  
  <p class="" pid=".772.0/1" pwmotiontext="yes">I beg to move,</p>
  
  <p class="indent" pid=".772.0/2" pwmotiontext="yes">That this House declines to give a Second Reading to the Pensions Bill because it fails to provide encouragement for individuals to save for their retirement or for companies to keep open existing pension schemes or start new ones and does nothing to mitigate the effect on the savings culture of the expansion of means-tested benefits in retirement; it omits measures permitting simplification and amendment of pension schemes' terms, abolishing compulsory AVC provision, simplifying anti-franking provisions, permitting people to continue working part-time for a company after retirement, abolishing or modifying Guaranteed Minimum Pensions, and new vesting arrangements; and further fails to provide help for the estimated 60,000 people who have already lost all or most of their pension entitlement.</p>
  
  <p pid=".860.1/1" pwmotiontext="yes"><i>The House having divided:</i> Ayes 154, Noes 388.</p>