§ Q1. Mr. Skinnerasked the Prime Minister whether he will place in the Library a copy of his public speech on 15th July in London on pensions.
§ Q2. Mr. Molloyasked the Prime Minister if he will place in the Library a copy of his public speech made in London on 15th July on pensions.
§ The Prime Minister (Mr. Harold Wilson)I did so on 18th July, Sir.
§ Mr. SkinnerIs my right hon. Friend aware that the Labour Government's pledge to increase pensions to £10 and 472 £16 will not go unheeded by the electorate when it is called upon? Does he agree that it is the trade unions, both Left and Right, which campaigned for this increase when more faltering voices were not heard? Will he further give an assurance that the next Labour Government will phase out supplementary benefits by giving further increases to old-age pensioners, and will also phase out supplementary benefits whether from this side of the Channel or the other?
§ The Prime MinisterThe action of the Government in raising pensions was widely regarded in the country as a necessary act of social justice. It is a fact that some leading trade unionists pressed for this as the first priority to be carried out and went to great lengths to explain to their members at work that they should make any necessary sacrifices for the benefit of these pensioners. On his other point, I refer my hon. Friend to the statement made by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Social Services.
Sir Harmar NichollsIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that by placing firms' pensions schemes in limbo, as occurred when the Government refused to carry on the plans made by the previous Government, he is causing uncertainty and unhappiness, and possibly real hardship? Will he put something firm in place of what was a very good arrangement?
§ The Prime MinisterWe do not agree that it was a good or fair arrangement. I do not agree with the hon. Gentleman. I am happy to tell him that he will soon be seeing the proposals on superannuation, which my right hon. Friend will be issuing in the near future.
§ Mr. MolloyDoes my right hon. Friend not agree that since he made that speech to Age Concern the Government have implemented the largest-ever increase in pensions? Is he aware that this is one of the things that annoy Conservative Members? Is he further aware that what was so encouraging in that speech was the obvious desire of the British Labour movement to achieve a situation in which we shall be able to link pensions to average earnings so that, as my right hon. Friend has rightly said, true help may be given to our old-age pensioners?
§ The Prime MinisterIn thanking my hon. Friend for his remarks, I reaffirm the commitment made about linking future increases in pensions to the average level of earnings.
§ Sir G. HoweWill the right hon. Gentleman tell the House why, in the speech to which he has referred, he found it necessary to make an entirely misleading comparison between the increases in the State basic pension and the prospective increases which would have accrued under the Conservative Government scheme for a second pension? Was it perhaps because he has a sense of guilt at the repeated failure of successive Labour Governments under his leadership to bring into operation any scheme for a second occupational pension?
§ The Prime MinisterI do not agree with the right hon. and learned Gentleman. The calculation which I gave on what the comparison would be was completely correct. As for a sense of guilt, while the right hon. and learned Gentleman, on his Front Bench merry-go-round, has no direct responsibility for the State reserve scheme, he certainly had collective responsibility for it, and I am sure that even he will agree, when my right hon. Friend's scheme is published, that it is a much fairer scheme.