HC Deb 14 July 1976 vol 915 cc663-5

3.58 p.m.

Mr. Gwilym Roberts (Cannock)

I beg to move, That leave be given to bring in a Bill to provide that the pensionable age of men be reduced to sixty by not later than 1st January 1985. It is something of a sad day for me to introduce this Bill, as it is now nearly 10 years to the day since I first introduced a similar Bill in this House. In the course of the intervening years we have had many similar Bills introduced by hon. Members, and even one or two by my right hon. Friends who now sit on the Government Front Bench. But I am sad to reflect that over the decade we have made no progress in this matter whatsoever. In fact, in some senses I think that we have gone backwards. After all, 10 years ago the late Mr. Richard Crossman was prepared to accept the need for this in principle. I am not sure that even the need in principle is now subscribed to by spokesmen of the Department of Health and Social Security.

No right minded person can argue with the principles of this Bill. There are, of course, two main arguments, First, there is the argument of sexual equality. But, when we talk in strict sex equality terms, we have to remember that women have a longer expectation of life than men. At 60, the expectation of life of a woman is about 19.9 years and that of a mere male about 15.3. At the age of 65, a woman retains her lead having an expectation of 16.6 years compared with a man's 12.1 years. So, in strict equality terms, one would have to have a proposition whereby men would retire about four and a half years earlier than women.

The second argument, which I believe is equally important, is the very simple one that a great many working men who have worked hard all their lives feel with some justification that they have done enough for the country's economy by the time that they have reached 60 years of age.

The Government's attitude to this proposition has been completely hypocritical. From the Government we have had a considerable amount of legislation on sexual equality, which I support. We have also had support from the Government for a great many provisions for extended leisure. But, at the same time as the Government are talking in terms of sexual equality and of provisions for extended leisure, in the one area where they can do something directly about it they have refused to do anything.

I accept, of course, that the Government have difficulties in this area. That is why this measure is an extremely moderate one. It gives the Government nine years in which to do something about it. This, of course, removes the cost argument which is so often put before us. If it is spread over a period like nine years, the cost of it becomes minimal. It would also allow many occupational schemes to adjust themselves to the new pension date. No one can tell what the cost is, of course, because no one knows what the take up would be. The Bill does not force men to retire at 60. Some men are very fit at 80, whereas others are finished in their 40s. That is a sad fact of life.

The Government will have noticed the decision taken at the conference of the National Union of Mineworkers, which I believe was agreed to unanimously, that mineworkers should be allowed to retire at 60. The Government should take this seriously. It is the feeling not only among mineworkers, because many industrial workers and their wives believe that men should be allowed to retire at this earlier age.

The difficulties of the Labour Government in the late 1960s which led to their defeat in the 1970 election were largely based on the fact that they grew out of touch with their rank and file support. I feel that their pigheaded attitude in this area could well be the straw which breaks the camel's back by antagonising millions of their potential supporters throughout the country. The Government will neglect at their peril this basic step towards sexual equality. It is at their peril that they ignore completely this simple humanitarian measure. It is a necessary measure of social justice.

Question put and agreed to.

Bill ordered to be brought in by Mr. Gwilym Roberts, Miss Jo Richardson, Miss Joan Maynard, Ms Maureen Colquhoun, Mrs. Audrey Wise, Mrs. Millie Miller, Miss Joan Lestor, Mr. George Rodgers, Mr. Alec Woodall, Mr. John Forrester and Mr. Ivor Clemitson.