Pension Schemes Bill: New Clause 26

**What happened:** On 3 December 2025, the House of Commons voted on New Clause 26 to the Pension Schemes Bill. The clause was defeated by 298 votes to 77. The government and its Labour and Labour-Co-operative members voted solidly against the new clause, while the Liberal Democrats provided the largest bloc of support with 62 votes in favour, joined by the Scottish National Party, Plaid Cymru, the Greens, and a handful of independents. **Why it matters:** The Pension Schemes Bill is a significant piece of legislation affecting how occupational pension schemes operate, how the Pension Protection Fund (the lifeboat fund for members of collapsed pension schemes) compensates members, and how trustees manage scheme surpluses. New Clause 26 was one of several opposition amendments seeking to go further than the government's own provisions, particularly on the question of indexation of pensions accrued before April 1997. The government's own new clauses 31 to 33 introduced prospective indexation for PPF and Financial Assistance Scheme payments linked to pre-1997 service, capped at 2.5% and tied to the Consumer Prices Index, benefiting an estimated 250,000 members with an average annual gain of around £400 over five years. The defeated new clause sought additional protections beyond this framework. **The politics:** The vote followed party lines closely, with Labour and Labour-Co-operative MPs voting unanimously against and opposition parties voting in favour. The Conservative Party did not appear in the division figures, suggesting their members were largely absent. The debate exposed a notable tension within the government's own ranks, with several Labour backbenchers pressing the minister for stronger action on solvent private companies that have refused to index-link pre-1997 pensions, including household names such as Hewlett Packard Enterprise, 3M, Goldman Sachs, and ExxonMobil. The minister acknowledged the concern but argued that new powers for trustees and forthcoming Pensions Regulator guidance would help address the issue without further legislation at this stage.