§ 8. Mrs. MahonTo ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what representations he has received regarding the Courage Brewery's pension funds; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. LilleyI have had no representations regarding the Courage Brewery's pension funds.
§ Mrs. MahonWell, I have—from many of my constituents who were worried when they read about the Harlin write-down. Is it not true that the regulatory system relies entirely on the honesty of the trustees and that if they prove not to be honest, the whole system collapses? When will the Secretary of State introduce regulations that give guarantees and security to pensioners? Is it not time that the Government took responsibility for some of the farces in the past?
§ Mr. LilleyIf the hon. Lady is questioning the honesty of any of the trustees, I hope that she will do so publicly. I do not know of any reason to do so. The Transport and General Workers Union has made a complaint and it is being investigated by the Investment Management Regulatory Organisation, whose responsibility that is. It will recommend whatever action it deems appropriate. I understand that the pension fund is in a healthy state and recently enhanced the benefits that if offers to its pensioners. Elected representatives from the membership sit on the committee of management, which has day-to-day control of the fund's administration. An investment sub-committee had been set up to scrutinise investment policies and an independent trustee to head that sub-committee has been appointed. Obviously, if the hon. Lady has any evidence that she want to submit to the regulatory authorities, she should do so.
§ Mr. LidingtonDoes my right hon. Friend agree that considerable reassurances could be given both to Courage Brewery pensioners and to members of other occupational pension schemes, not least the many hundreds of Maxwell pensioners in my constituency, if the Securities and Investments Board were now to publish its report on the Maxwell scandal or, at the very least, those aspects of it which could be made public without prejudicing criminal proceedings? In that way, hon. Members on both sides of the House can know what went wrong with the regulatory 11 arrangements, and we and our constituents can have an informed debate about what needs to be done to put things right.
§ Mr. LilleyYes, I agree with my hon. Friend. The Securities and Investments Board has said that it wishes to publish as much as possible, subject only to the legal advice that it receives on the risks of prejudicing a fair trial. Obviously, the Government concur with that.