HC Deb 12 April 1962 vol 657 cc1473-4
6. Mr. Russell

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations if he will make a further statement about the position of members of the Colonial and Overseas Services, formerly employed in certain Commonwealth countries, who have not been granted pension increases commensurate with those of the United Kingdom Pensions (Increase) Act, 1959.

The Joint Under-Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations (Mr. Bernard Braine)

There is nothing I can add at present to the general statement of Government policy made by my hon. Friend the Financial Secretary to the Treasury on 21st December last.

Mr. Russell

Is it not a fact that only some Commonwealth Governments are not facing up to their requirements on this matter of pensions increases? Can my hon. Friend say what representations are being made by Her Majesty's Government to those countries which are defaulting in this respect?

Mr. Braine

The answer to the first part of the supplementary question is, yes, it is only some Governments. The answer to the second part is that while it is not open to my right hon. Friend to make formal representations to Governments about how they deal with their own employees, nevertheless we bring to their attention increases in our own pensions. My right hon. Friend would be willing to forward to those Governments any representations which the pensioners themselves wish to make.

Mr. Strachey

Would not the Joint Under-Secretary agree that it would pay us to have a rather more generous attitude in this matter? After all, this is a form of assistance which we can give to under-developed countries, as well as to the individuals concerned by giving them security of tenure. Would this not be a very economical way of giving assistance, even if it meant a larger share of the burden falling on the British Treasury?

Mr. Braine

That sounds all very well, but on the whole Commonwealth Governments are treating their pensioners very well indeed. As the Financial Secretary told the House—this is why I quoted his speech—for us to interfere in their payments to their former employees might gratuitously call into question the security of the basic pensions themselves, which would help no one.