1.  We compliment the previous Secretary of State for Social Security, Rt Hon Harriet Harman, and the former Leader of the House, Rt Hon Ann Taylor, for their close interest and support for our inquiry piloting the pre-legislative scrutiny of draft Bills (paragraph 1).

2.  We note that any major revision, or postponement, of the Family Law Act 1996 could require consequential changes to the pension sharing legislation (paragraph 9).

3.  We note that while many people may expect pension sharing to lead to a transformation of the income prospects of divorced women in old age, the new powers may in effect alter only the method of dividing assets at the time of divorce, without directly affecting the disparity in retirement incomes between men and women (paragraph 14).

4.  We recommend that the operation of the powers conferred on the courts by the Pension Sharing Act and their consequences for the incomes in retirement of divorced people should be rigorously studied by independent researchers, and that the results of that research should be published at regular intervals for the information of Parliament and the public (paragraph 17).

DIVORCE LAW

5.  In our view it would not be appropriate to use pension sharing legislation to introduce the more wide-ranging reforms of extending (or adapting) the Scottish treatment of matrimonial property to the other jurisdictions in the United Kingdom (paragraph 24).

6.  In our view the courts should give greater priority to the prospective incomes in retirement of each of the divorcing couple when approving financial settlements on the dissolution of a marriage (paragraph 24).

7.  We recommend that the Government should monitor the operation of pension sharing in Scotland in respect of the changes in valuation of the pension share between the relevant date and the date of implementation of the pension share (paragraph 25).

8.  We recommend that the Government should monitor the operation of pension sharing in Scotland, with a view to introducing as necessary a requirement that the valuation of a pension share at the time of making the sharing order should be based on a percentage of the transfer value of the pension at the relevant date (paragraph 25).

9.  We recommend that attachment should be retained for use in cases where it is clearly shown to benefit one of the parties (paragraph 27).

10.  We recommend that the Government should require the Judicial Studies Board to provide for the training of 'ticketed' or specialist judges at each level on the implications of pension sharing before it comes into effect (paragraph 29).

11.  We believe that there is an urgent need for the professional lawyers' organisations to develop their family law accreditation schemes to enable them to carry out training on the implications of pension sharing before it comes into effect (paragraph 30).

12.  We recommend that the new Financial Services Authority should review the provision of pensions advice in divorce cases, including the adequacy of investment advice made available by family lawyers, and if necessary provide further guidance for independent financial advisers and insurance companies before pension sharing comes into effect (paragraph 31).

13.  We recommend that Ministers' intentions with regard to the legal aid treatment of pension sharing should be announced to Parliament before the beginning of detailed consideration of the Pension Sharing Bill (paragraph 32).

14.  We recommend that the Bill should be amended to avoid any doubt whatsoever that pension sharing may only be used in cases where the application for divorce is made after the Pension Sharing Act is brought into force (paragraph 37).

15.  We recommend that the long title of the Bill should be amended to make it clear that any amendments to require pension schemes to extend to unmarried survivors the same rights as widows and widowers would be within the scope of the Bill (paragraph 38).

16.  We recommend that the Government should take the opportunity to clarify the law by bringing forward amendments to the Pension Sharing Bill, once the outcome of the Pensions Review has been decided, to provide the same degree of protection against bankruptcy for all kinds of pension provision (paragraph 44).

PENSIONS

17.  We recommend that the courts should be given a limited discretion to cater for circumstances where serious anomalies would arise from the rigid use of a standard cash equivalent transfer valuation (CETV) of pension rights (paragraph 47).

18.  We recommend that the Government should simplify the pension credit by requiring that the inflation-proofing of all its elements should be provided only in the form of the limited price indexation which is applied in any case to any increases in pension rights after April 1997 (paragraph 49).

19.  We recommend that the jurisdiction of the Pensions Ombudsman should be extended to enable him to rule on the reasonableness of pension sharing costs charged by pension providers (paragraph 50).

20.  We recommend that the Department should work with interested parties to develop standardised forms for the disclosure of information associated with the calculation of a CETV (paragraph 51).

21.  We recommend that the new Financial Services Authority should impose a strict regime for the illustrative projections of benefits emerging from transfer credits and for complete transparency of the structure and level of commission or other charges for financial advice (paragraph 54).

22.  We recommend that the Department should monitor the pensions credits available to, and options chosen by, former spouses and the extent to which personal pensions purchased with pension credits are encashed before normal retirement age (paragraph 55).

23.  We recommend that the financial and administrative impact on occupational pension arrangements of occupational pensions legislation and family law should be minimised (paragraph 56).

24.  We recommend that the Department should consult the Financial Services Authority and the relevant interested parties on the practical steps that may be taken to ensure that a suitable investment vehicle or benefit structures are made available to former spouses (paragraph 57).

25.  We recommend that the provisions of the draft legislation imposing a reduced ceiling on contributions to an occupational pension scheme following a pension debit should be dropped (paragraph 59).

26.  We recommend that pension providers and insurers should have the right to request medical evidence in respect of the sharing of pensions in payment (paragraph 61).

27.  We recommend that the monitoring of pension sharing arrangements should address any particular problems emerging from further marriages (paragraph 62).

28.  We recommend that further consideration should be given to the time limits allowed for each stage of the pension sharing process to ensure that the proposed statutory limits are reasonable, fair and achievable (paragraph 66).

29.  We recommend that the Bill should be amended to extend to former spouses of members of unfunded public service schemes the same rights of choosing how to take a pension transfer as will be available to former spouses of members of funded schemes (paragraph 70).

CONCLUSION

30.  We recommend that the Government should consult interested parties on the possibility of delaying the implementation of the Pension Sharing Act, together with the Regulations to be made under its provisions, until April 2001 (paragraph 71).

31.  We recommend that any draft Bill published by the Government in future should be laid before Parliament as a Command Paper (paragraph 74).

32.  We recommend that Bills which are to be published in draft for pre-legislative scrutiny by a select committee in the Session before their formal introduction should be published no later than Easter, in order to allow potential witnesses plenty of time to prepare their evidence and for the select committee to complete its work before the end of the Session (paragraph 75).