HC Deb 16 July 1974 vol 877 cc217-20
1. Mr. McCrindle

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services when she will announce her new pension proposals.

17. Mr. Crouch

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what consultation she is having with the insurance industry over her new pension proposals.

18. Mr. Boscawen

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services whether it is the Government's intention to abolish the married women's option.

25. Mr. Norman Lamont

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services whether she will seek a meeting with the National Association of Pension Funds.

The Minister of State, Department of Health and Social Security (Mr. Brian O'Malley)

We shall publish a White Paper setting out the Government's pension proposals as soon as possible, and those proposals will form the basis for consultation and discussion. As far as the details of our plans are concerned, I must ask the House to await the White Paper.

Mr. McCrindle

I thank the Minister for that reply. Can he confirm that the broad basis upon which these proposals will come forward will be that of a second pension, as suggested in the Social Security Act 1973? Can he further confirm reports that the proposals will include a better deal for women and a faster accrual rate for older people? If those assumptions are correct, can he confirm that this can be achieved only by a substantially increased rate of contribution and a degree of cross-subsidisation to those already retired?

Mr. O'Malley

I can only ask the hon. Gentleman to await the publication of the White Paper.

Mr. Marks

Before bringing in any new scheme, will the Secretary of State consult the Chancellor of the Exchequer with a view to giving tax relief on contributions to the national scheme or tax exemption for the pensions paid?

Mr. O'Malley

I am aware of these matters, which will be receiving, as they are already receiving, along with all other matters, the closest consideration.

Mr. Boscawen

While one understands why the investigation into the Government's pension scheme is taking such a long time and that it is harming many people who would otherwise, from next April, be in the second pension scheme, may I ask the Minister to confirm that he will continue with the married woman's option, from which 3 million women benefit? Does he propose to bring forward during this Parliament the Bill to increase considerably the contributions for the married woman's option without giving her any better benefits?

Mr. O'Malley

On the last question relating to Bills this Session, the House will be aware that there is already a Bill which deals with the matter the hon. Gentleman has raised. On the question of the married woman's option and our intentions in the long-term pension proposals, I must ask the hon. Gentleman also to await publication of the White Paper. When he complains that we are taking a long time to bring forward proposals, I would point out that after his Government scrapped the Crossman proposals it took them over two years to bring forward their proposals. We shall do it much more quickly than that.

Mr. Gwilym Roberts

Does my hon. Friend accept that some of us on this side are far more anxious that the Government should not rush this matter but should produce a progressive pension scheme which will stand the test of time? Will he accept that in producing this sort of scheme he must think in terms of making proposals, which necessarily must become law, for the next 20 years and that the pension scheme should be designed to stand that sort of test?

Mr. O'Malley

This Government are moving with a speedy efficiency on pension proposals which was not characteristic of the last Government. On my hon. Friend's second question, I hope that the proposals we bring forward for consideration and consultation in the White Paper will lead to the setting up of a structure which will stand for a long time.

Mr. Kenneth Clarke

But is the Minister aware that he has already dropped enough hints, in the House, in the Press and to the pensions world, for us to know that he is contemplating the introduction of a Crossman-type scheme of big earnings-related contributions to pay for grandiose promises of earnings-related benefits in future? Is he also aware that as his party has had so much practice in preparing pension schemes over the past few years we suspect that he is toying with the idea of holding the scheme back until after an election because of the unpopularity of any such proposal with the occupational pensions industry and with all those whose savings and deferred pay are in schemes which will be threatened by what he has in mind?

Mr. O'Malley

I have not dropped hints; I have thrown bricks at the proposals of the last Government. They put forward a pension scheme which not even their friends are prepared to defend. From his attendance at meetings of his own back-bench committee on this subject, the hon. Gentleman must know the views of some of his hon. Friends on the proposals that his Government brought forward. If he likes, I can expand on that.

I have made no comments either inside or outside the House about the detailed shape of the pension proposals that we intend to bring forward. What I have said is that the levels of pensions which the hon. Gentleman's Government were bringing forward are rejected by us as utterly inadequate. We intend to bring forward proposals which will be acceptable to any fair-minded citizens of this country who want to see men and women live decently in retirement.