Hansard - United Kingdom Parliament

61 Pensions Bill [Lords]
20 JUNE 2011
Pensions Bill [Lords]
62
another U-turn. I am not sure whether it is Conservative
or Liberal Democrat Members who are behind it, although
I know who will claim the credit. The Secretary of State
told the Financial Times today that there are “issues and
concerns” that need sorting out, while senior Ministers,
says the Daily Mail,
“are telling the Chancellor he must think again.”
The Secretary of State, it says, is “sympathetic”. I have
to ask, then: why are we voting on a Bill that the
Government do not believe in? The Chief Secretary
does not believe in it; the Pensions Minister does not
believe in it; half of the Liberal Democrat Members do
not believe in it; the Tory Whips do not believe in it.
What on earth are we doing going into the Division
Lobbies to vote to punish half a million women through
a Bill that no one believes in? Will the hon. Gentleman
answer that question now?
The Minister of State, Department for Work and
Pensions (Steve Webb): It is unclear whether the right
hon. Gentleman is going to vote against Second
Reading—he has not said so yet. On the assumption
that he is, he would have to find not just the £10 billion
that his hon. Friends want to raise, but the £30 billion
that this Bill saves. Where will he find £30 billion when
all the money is gone?
Mr Byrne: I am glad that the Minister has raised that
point. His own consultation, which closes on Friday, is
examining the question of how savings can be made
through acceleration of the granting of the state pension
age later in life. That is an issue that should have been
brought to the House for debate before we were asked
to debate egregious measures that will hit half a million
women. We should re-examine the timetable for the
raising of the retirement age to 67, but that must be
done on the basis of equal treatment of the sexes, and
the principle that people should be given time to prepare.
We are sick of this confusion. We are sick of this
chaos. We say to the Government today, “No more: you
need to get a grip. Take this Bill away, and bring us a
plan that you have had the decency to half think through.”
“The critical factor in pension arrangements is certainty. People
need to be able to plan with certainty”.—[Official Report, 11 January
2011; Vol. 342, c. 179.]
Those are not my words, but the words of the Pensions
Minister who is responsible for the Bill. Tonight the
House will be asked to vote on a broken promise. We
urge the Government to think again. We shall vote to
oppose the Bill, and I urge others to do the same.
Several hon. Members rose—
Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Nigel Evans): Order. As
Members can see, this is a popular debate. Although I
am not introducing a time limit at this point, if Members
do not exercise restraint themselves, one will be introduced.
5.36 pm
Jonathan Evans (Cardiff North) (Con): Let me begin
by drawing the House’s attention to the Register of
Members’Financial Interests, which shows my connections
with the pensions industry over many years.
As you know, Mr Deputy Speaker, you and I entered
the House on the same day back in 1992, but this is the
first opportunity that I have had to observe the right
hon. Member for Birmingham, Hodge Hill (Mr Byrne)
in full flow. I have often wondered how he managed to
reach such an elevated position in Government in such
a short time, and having listened to him today, I am still
wondering.
I was staggered by the right hon. Gentleman’s opening
remarks, in which he said how proud he was of his
Government’s record on pensions. Is he utterly unaware
of the destruction of the private pensions system in our
country wrought by his former leader, and of the revelation
that when the Labour Government were elected in
1997, the National Association of Pension Funds said
that the end of dividend tax credit would mean the end
of at least half the defined benefit schemes in our
country? In fact, we have seen much more than that
brought about as a direct result of the Labour Government’s
policy. I believe that it was forecast to cost our private
pensions system at least £50 billion. Is the right hon.
Gentleman proud of the fact that under a Labour
Government a record number of pension funds closed
to new business? Is he proud of the record of a Labour
Government who gave pensioners an increase of merely
pence? I can tell him that people in my constituency
remember that event.
Sheila Gilmore: Will the hon. Gentleman give way?
Jonathan Evans: I will in a moment—unlike the right
hon. Member for Birmingham, Hodge Hill, who was
not prepared to hear these remarks from me.
Two years ago, the state earnings-related pension
scheme was not increased by even one penny by the
Labour Government. That is an illustration of how
much we can trust Labour on pensions.
Sheila Gilmore: Government Members constantly
raise the subject of the 75p pension increase. It is not
necessarily a choice that I would have made, but it is the
choice that the Labour Government made at the time.
The hon. Gentleman should bear in mind that that
increase was introduced during the first couple of years
of that Labour Government, when they were following
Conservative financial rules.
Jonathan Evans: I am trying to get my head around
the idea of Tony Blair standing at the Dispatch Box and
taking his instructions from my right hon. Friend the
Member for Richmond (Yorks) (Mr Hague). It is a little
bit too difficult for me to accept.
I think it important for us to recognise real concerns
that have been raised throughout the country. All Members
of Parliament have received many letters, e-mails and
other representations relating specifically to the proposals
to increase the age at which the state pension kicks in
and the impact that that will have on a number of
people, not least women.
Mrs Anne Main (St Albans) (Con): Before my hon.
Friend moved on from his powerful previous argument,
I wish he had remembered to add to his list the discreditable
way Equitable Life victims were treated. Their pension
shortfall dilemmas were kicked into the long grass for
many years.
Jonathan Evans: I am grateful to my hon. Friend for
making that observation, but I hope she will forgive me
for not going down that road. If we were to do so there