HC Deb 22 January 1965 vol 705 cc601-6

1.15 p.m.

Sir D. Renton

I beg to move Amendment No. 12, in page 12, line 24, to leave out "to" and to insert "and".

The effect of this Amendment would be that in applying the provisions relating to Members' pensions to the widow, widower or children of a Prime Minister we would leave out Clause 9, which deals with pensions for certain widowers. The effect of that Clause is that if a woman Member of Parliament dies and has a husband who, by reason of incapability, owing to age or bodily or mental infirmity, of earning his own living, is dependent upon her, then her widower husband gets a pension. Therefore, when we apply that provision, as it is applied by Clause 16, to a Prime Minister, the position that is envisaged is that of our having a woman Prime Minister with a husband who is incapable of earning his own living by reason of age or bodily or mental infirmity, and is therefore wholly or mainly dependent on her.

I wish to make it abundantly clear, first, that I do not think that the Government are wrong in envisaging the possibility of our having a woman Prime Minister. Neither do I think the Government are wrong in making the assumption in the drafting of the Bill that that woman Prime Minister might have a husband wholly or mainly dependent on her because of his incapability as defined by the Bill. What I do suggest is that this is a new departure in the provision made by the State for the protection of individuals against hardship. If it is not a new departure, we should be told of other women servants of the State whose widowers would get help of this kind.

If it is right for a provision of this kind to be made, and if it is a new departure in protecting the dependants of the servants of the State against hardship of the kind mentioned, I should have thought that it was the sort of new departure that should start in the lower ranges of those in the service of the State and work upwards; and that it is not the sort of departure that should be made applicable to the widower of a Prime Minister only, leaving the others to tag along eventually, in the course of time.

The effect of this Amendment, therefore, would be to leave out the Prime Minister in respect of this provision, for the reasons I have given. I think that it is a movement that should start low down and move upwards, rather than letting the most important servant of the State—if we leave out the Sovereign herself—be the sole beneficiary, as far as I know, of this provision. I hope I have explained the matter sufficiently for the Chief Secretary to enable the Committee to receive an explanation of the position. It certainly is one which should be looked at.

Sir R. Cary

In formally supporting what has been said by my right hon. and learned Friend, I find it a rather exciting prospect that there could be a woman Prime Minister. If without being out of order I may refer to another situation, I remind the Committee that we had a brilliantly successful woman Lord Mayor in Manchester, Dame Mary Kingsmill Jones. We should like to see such a situation repeated at No. 10 Downing Street.

Although I may have an opinion about this Clause and the Amendment, as it is a pension matter and I am a trustee of the Member's Fund, it would be wrong for me to express a personal opinion.

Mr. Diamond

I am most grateful to the right hon. and learned Member for explaining his Amendment. I did not understand its purpose but I was delighted to hear him say—and I share his view—that the Amendment was not moved in any way in an anti-feminist attitude. We have a very distinguished Commonwealth woman Prime Minister. So far as we know, we shall continue to see that lady in that office. It is not for me, however, to make comments on elections in other countries, but provisions of this kind should be thought about.

The immediate answer to the question posed by the right hon. and learned Member is that this is quite standard procedure the whole way through the Civil Service and was introduced as early as the 1949 Superannuation Act. It is absolutely standard. Once we accept the principle which the right hon. and learned Gentleman enunciated very clearly (a) that we might have a woman Prime Minister, and (b), that the husband may because of illness or some other situation on becoming a widower not be in a position to maintain children who are dependent as defined, we have a situation in which we need the subsection which the Amendment seeks to remove. In those circumstances, I hope he will accept that this is absolutely standard and has moved up right from the bottom. We think of the possibility of a woman Prime Minister and should certainly incorporate this provision. I hope that the right hon. and learned Member will feel that this is a satisfactory explanation in reply to his question.

Sir D. Renton

I accept the explanation and am most grateful for it. The hon. Gentleman has enlightened me on a matter I did not know about. In view of what he has said, I have no hesitation in asking leave to withdraw the Amendment. I think the hon. Gentleman expected me to be anti-feminist on this question. I am sure he is glad to be disappointed in that respect. No spokes- men from this side of the Committee would be anti-feminist, for we have far more potential women Prime Ministers than any other party. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Question proposed, That the Clause stand part of the Bill.

Sir D. Renton

There is a rather important drafting point which I should be grateful if the Chief Secretary could consider. It might not be fair to ask for an immediate answer at the moment, but, if he will say that he will consider it that will ease the minds of my hon. Friends and myself.

In subsection (2) we find that the dependants of a Prime Minister are to get the benefit of Clauses 8, 9 and 10, and paragraph (b) says: for the purpose of calculating the annual amount of any pension under the said provisions, the pension to which the Prime Minister was or would have been entitled shall be treated as reduced by one-third. Several of my hon. Friends, when considering the Bill, shared with me the view that we need to make abundantly clear that here we are referring, not to the pension which the Prime Minister would get as such and which is mentioned in subsection (1) of this Clause, but to the pension which he will never get if he gets a Prime Minister's pension—the pension which the Prime Minister would be entitled to receive as a Member of Parliament if he had not become eligible for the Prime Minister's pension.

Mr. Diamond

indicated dissent.

Sir D. Renton

The Chief Secretary shakes his head. That means that this Clause needs clarification. If the explanation is not the one I have given I should think the wording is not plain. We need to have it made abundantly clear which pension is to be reduced by one-third and exactly what the effect of paragraph (b) is.

Mr. Diamond

I am again grateful to the right hon. and learned Gentleman for drawing attention to this matter. If as a distinguished lawyer he says that there is lack of clarity, I must certainly accept that. I can speak with authority as to what is intended, but not with the same authority as can the right hon. and learned Gentleman as to the drafting of a Clause.

What is intended here is the Prime Minister's pension as such, the reduction in the pension attaching to the office of Prime Minister. As soon as a Member becomes a Prime Minister he loses all rights to his Member's pension. The rest of the Bill provides for that. As soon the Member becomes Prime Minister, the contributions are refunded and he is treated as if he had ceased to be a Member so far as his pension rights as an ordinary back-bench Member are concerned. Upon becoming the Prime Minister he automatically becomes entitled on the first day—nay, the first hour—to a full Prime Minister's pension.

The Prime Minister's pension is not related, as is a back-bench pension, to a period of service; it is related to the office. As soon as he becomes Prime Minister he becomes eligible in certain circumstances to his pension, namely, when he retires. I do not put it higher than that because I do not attempt to match my draftsmanship with that of the right hon. and learned Member, but I suspect that it will be confirmed that, inasmuch as by the time a Member becomes a Prime Minister he has ceased to have any entitlement whatever to his pension as a back-bench Member, then this reference to or would have been entitled could refer only to his pension as a Prime Minister.

I repeat that what is intended is clear and I hope that I have made it clear to the right hon. and learned Member. What he has asked me to do is to see that the drafting makes that intention absolutely clear and leaves no doubt as to the interpretation I have given. He asked me to take steps between now and a subsequent stage of the Bill to see that the drafting complies with that interpretation. I give him that assurance without hesitation.

1.30 p.m.

Sir D. Renton

I am grateful for the assurance. In view of what has been said, it obviously must be given and the drafting must be reconsidered. With great respect to the Chief Secretary, I do not see how his explanation can be right, because I think that the whole of the discussion is qualified by the words On the death of a person who ceases to be Prime Minister and First Lord of the Treasury after the commencement of this Act". Therefore, I would have assumed that nothing in subsection (2) could refer to the Prime Minister's own pension. It can refer only to the pension payable to his dependants under Clauses 8 to 10. However, it is abundantly plain that the point needs reconsidering. I certainly would not press the Chief Secretary for further explanation. I am glad that he has undertaken to look at the point again.

Sir R. Cary

May I ask the Chief Secretary on a point of clarification whether it is not true that the Prime Minister is the only Member of the House who, on becoming Prime Minister, automatically ceases to be a subscribing member of the contributory pension fund and the Members' pension fund?

Mr. Diamond

He is one of two exceptions, the other being Mr. Speaker.

Question put and agreed to.

Clause ordered to stand part of the Bill.