Civil Partnership Bill [Lords]

---

[back to previous text]

Angela Eagle: My right hon. Friend's response, again, has filled us all with joy, at least on the Government side of the Committee, and I suspect various Members on the Opposition Benches. We all like to see jigsaws completed, especially jigsaws of equality.

I have no pretension to being a lawyer, and although I do not have the chance to withdraw my amendment, there are those in government much better qualified than me to get the technicalities right to bring about the aim that my right hon. Friend has just expressed. As a former social security Minister, I would like to say that the involvement of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions has had a positive effect, and I would like to place on record my thanks to him and Treasury Ministers for being so understanding. I look forward to the final piece of the jigsaw being put in place on Report.

Mr. Carmichael: The Minister leaves me at something of a loss. As far as I have understood it, proceedings in this place run something roughly along these lines: we make eminently sensible suggestions, Ministers stand up, suck their teeth and say, ''We'd like to, but we can't really'', there is a vote, we lose and that is the end of it. I did not realise until today that the mere expression of my scepticism was such a powerful tool. I shall bear that in mind for future reference.

Mr. Bercow: I do not want to encourage the hon. Gentleman to entertain unrealistic expectations, but is this the first example of pre-emptive gratification that he has enjoyed and does he not think that we can look forward to other examples from the Treasury in future?

Mr. Carmichael: I am trying to get my mind round the concept of pre-emptive gratification. I suppose that I should take my hands out of my pockets as I do so.

I am grateful to the Minister for having taken on the concerns, and in such circumstances I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Column Number: 184

Jacqui Smith: I beg to move amendment No. 77, in clause 245, page 120, line 10, leave out from '(1)' to 'may' in line 14.

The Chairman: With this it will be convenient to discuss Government amendment No. 78.

Jacqui Smith: This is a slightly less exciting but nevertheless important Government amendment, which contains the power to amend existing provisions within pensions legislation to make provision for surviving civil partners or dependents of deceased civil partners. I am sure that hon. Members will agree that the power will fulfil a useful purpose in line with the overall policy of the Bill. We have made it clear that we intend to use that power to amend the contracting-out rules governing private and public sector pensions, the judicial pension schemes and church legislation in relation to survivor pension benefits.

In the other place, Lord Higgins drew attention to the report of the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee, which recommends that in the clause either some indication of the policy should be included or, failing that, any order made under the clause, whether it amends an Act or not, should be subject to affirmative parliamentary procedure. Ideally, we would have included all those provisions in the Bill.

Clause 246 and schedule 25, which we shall come to, already include amendments to statutory pension schemes, but pensions legislation is immensely complex and detailed, as I have discovered during the past few weeks. It is therefore important to ensure that the changes made by the Bill fit with the overall scheme of that legislation, particularly as the Pensions Bill currently progressing through Parliament will make further changes.

I am happy to accept, however, that the exercising of the power that we are taking in the clause should be subject to full parliamentary agreement through use of the affirmative procedure, as the House of Lords required. That is what Government amendments Nos. 77 and 78 achieve.

Mr. Chope: I welcome the amendment as a step in the right direction, because without it the existing power would be extremely wide. However, I would be grateful if the Minister would answer a question that still troubles me. She said that clause 245 is subject to amendment because pensions legislation is very complicated. Similarly, inheritance tax law is highly complex. Why have the Government been prepared to incorporate in the Bill detailed provisions and powers in respect of pensions but have not been able to do anything about inheritance tax?

Jacqui Smith: As has been said previously, while we can appropriately legislate through the order-making power in respect of pensions in this legislation, it is a long-standing convention, not only of this Government, that tax provisions are the subject of Finance Bills because of the interrelatedness of all such matters. We made it completely clear that the inheritance tax implications of our policy will be made real in the first available Finance Bill. That is the right and appropriate place for considering such

Column Number: 185

provisions, and I hope that the hon. Gentleman will take my assurance in respect of the policy that we have set down.

Mr. Chope: When the Minister says ''the first available'', does she mean the first one?

Jacqui Smith: No, I mean the first available Bill in which it is appropriate to put into place the tax changes that would come from the policy set out in this Bill. I assure the hon. Gentleman that we will certainly be in the position when we implement the provisions of the Bill also to have in place the tax provisions that will stem from it.

Amendment agreed to.

Amendment made: No. 78, in clause 245, page 120, line 24, leave out subsections (11) and (12).—[Jacqui Smith.]

Clause 245, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 246 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Schedule 25 agreed to.

Clause 247 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Schedule 26 agreed to.

Clauses 248 and 249 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 250

Community obligations and civil partners

Jacqui Smith: I beg to move amendment No. 114, in clause 250, page 123, line 16, leave out subsections (1) and (2) and insert—

'(1) Subsection (2) applies where any person, by Order in Council or regulations under section 2(2) of the European Communities Act 1972 (c.68) (general implementation of Treaties)—

(a) is making provision for the purpose of implementing, or for a purpose concerning, a Community obligation of the United Kingdom which relates to persons who are or have been parties to a marriage, or

(b) has made such provision and it has not been revoked.

(2) The appropriate person may by Order in Council or (as the case may be) by regulations make provision in relation to persons who are or have been civil partners in a civil partnership that is the same or similar to the provision referred to in subsection (1).'.

The Chairman: With this it will be convenient to discuss Government amendment No. 115.

Jacqui Smith: The clause confers a power to make domestic provision for civil partners if European Community legislation requiring implementation deals with persons who are or have been married or whose marriage is void, but is silent about persons who are or have been in a civil partnership or whose civil partnership was void.

The amendments have the effect of making possible the exercising of the power in clause 250 by any person who is exercising the power in section 2(2) of the European Communities Act 1972, or who would have that power if section 2(2) were being used at the same time as the exercising of the power in clause 250. That includes the devolved Administrations, in circumstances in which they would have the power to use section 2(2) of the 1972 Act. The amendments

Column Number: 186

ensure that the power in clause 250 is available where implementing measures are being made under section 2(2), and also where they have already been made.

The amendments add a power to make Orders in Council alongside the existing power to make regulations, and they apply to statutory instruments made under clause 250 the same procedural provisions that apply to instruments made under section 2(2) of the 1972 Act.

I have no doubt that that is clear to members of the Committee.

Mr. Bercow: Will the Minister give way?

Jacqui Smith: Yes, I will and, what is more, I will answer the hon. Gentleman.

Mr. Bercow: I do not think that in the parity of states one could wish for anything better. It is as clear as clear can be. However, I wonder whether the Minister would like to demonstrate her knowledge of the extent of the clarity by providing a practical example that we can long savour. I am sure that most of us strongly support what is proposed, but it would be quite helpful to know what it actually means.

Jacqui Smith: I would be delighted to explain to the Committee that the issue relates to the fact that although some EU legislation refers to a person's spouse, to date there has been little mention of registered or civil partners. That is basically the problem that we are trying to identify. We should be able to have a power that is analogous with that in section 2(2) of the 1972 Act in order to ensure that we can include civil partners. The new directive 2004/38/EC on free movement for EU citizens and their families may mark a turning point. However, there is no guarantee that future Community legislation will deal either at all, or clearly, with the position of civil partners. This power therefore enables the Government to make comparable domestic provision for civil partners where Community legislation requiring implementation deals with married persons but is silent in relation to civil partners.

For example, the Department for Constitutional Affairs has relatively recently made an Order in Council under section 2(2) of the 1972 Act—I am sure that both the Act and the order will be familiar to hon. Members—to implement Community obligations relating to maintenance. It would not want to be restricted in the future to making regulations in order to avail itself of the power in clause 250 to make comparable provisions for civil partners. In other words, we could use the power in clause 250 to make provision for civil partners that is parallel with that being made, in respect of the example on which the hon. Member for Buckingham (Mr. Bercow) pressed me—by section 2(2) of the 1972 Act.

With that explanation, I hope that hon. Members will feel able to support the amendment.

Amendment agreed to.

Amendment made: No. 115, in clause 250, page 123, line 27, leave out subsections (4) to (7) and insert—

'(4) ''The appropriate person'' means—

(a) if subsection (1)(a) applies, the person making the provision referred to there;

Column Number: 187

(b) if subsection (1)(b) applies, any person who would have power to make the provision referred to there if it were being made at the time of the exercise of the power under subsection (2).

(5) The following provisions apply in relation to the power conferred by subsection (2) to make an Order in Council or regulations as they apply in relation to the power conferred by section 2(2) of the 1972 Act to make an Order in Council or regulations—

(a) paragraph 2 of Schedule 2 to the 1972 Act (procedure etc.in relation to making of Orders in Council and regulations: general);

(b) paragraph 15(3)(c) of Schedule 8 to the Scotland Act 1998 (c.46) (modifications of paragraph 2 in relation to Scottish Ministers and to Orders in Council made on the recommendation of the First Minister);

(c) paragraph 3 of Schedule 2 to the 1972 Act (modifications of paragraph 2 in relation to Northern Ireland departments etc.)and the Statutory Rules (Northern Ireland) Order 1979 (S.I. 1979/1573 (N.I.12)) (treating the power conferred by subsection (2) as conferred by an Act passed before 1st January 1974 for the purposes of the application of that Order);

(d) section 29(3) of the Government of Wales Act 1998 (c.38) (modifications of paragraph 2 in relation to the National Assembly for Wales).'.—[Jacqui Smith.]

Clause 250, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

 

---

Prepared 26 October 2004