HL Deb 19 February 1979 vol 398 cc1522-4

2.47 p.m.

Lord AYLESTONE

My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

The Question was as follows:

To ask Her Majesty's Government on what date the question of "reckon-able service" arising out of the debate on the Parliamentary Pensions Bill in 1977–78 (now the Act of 1978) was referred to the Top Salaries Review Body in accordance with the undertaking made during the passage of the Bill.

The Lord PRIVY SEAL (Lord Peart)

My right honourable friend the Prime Minister wrote to the noble Lord, Lord Boyle, chairman of the Top Salaries Review Body, on 23rd October 1978 asking him to review and make recommendations on the pension position of former Members of the House of Commons who left the House before the passing of the Parliamentary Pensions Act 1978.

Lord AYLESTONE

My Lords, while thanking my noble friend for his reply and particularly for the helpful part he has played in obtaining this Answer, may I ask him whether he will now, in accordance with his own promise, approach the noble Lord, Lord Boyle, to give some priority to the matter in order that the widows of former Members of Parliament may get some benefit immediately?

Lord PEART

My Lords, my noble friend will realise that the timing of a discussion on this subject is a matter for the review body. After all, the Prime Minister has communicated with the chairman, and I think that is as far as I can go at this stage. We regard it as an urgent matter.

Lord BOOTHBY

My Lords, may I ask the noble Lord the Leader of the House whether it is not a fact that from the very outset the Boyle Committee set itself against granting any pensions at all—years ago—to Members of Parliament who sat there before the year 1964, some for many years; since when many of them—perhaps the majority—have died? To my certain knowledge some of them have died in penury; and, in the circumstances, would it not be better not to pursue this matter for the sake of the handful of those who remain, but to try to forget it?

Lord PEART

My Lords, the noble Lord has put a point of view; but I think he will remember that we had a debate on this subject and we promised that this matter would be raised again. So that is the position; it is now being examined.

Viscount ECCLES

My Lords, would the noble Lord the Leader of the House assure us that the case of that handful of ex-Ministers who, in the matter of pensions, have been so badly treated in comparison with Her Majesty's Government's present Ministers, has also been referred to the top review body?

Lord PEART

My Lords, I know that the noble Viscount spoke on this during our debate and the main argument was on the issue of pensions. If it is possible to have this added to the other matter, I am prepared to look at it; but the Prime Minister has fulfilled a promise and I would prefer to leave it at that. We asked for this and it is being examined.

Viscount ECCLES

My Lords, from my recollection of the debate I think that the noble Lord himself said that these particular people would be referred.

Lord PEART

My Lords, I will make sure that that promise is fulfilled in the sense that they will consider this, but the main issue is the pensions issue.

Lord JANNER

My Lords, may I ask my noble friend whether the Government will intimate that they think this matter ought to be dealt with, that the people concerned may in some instances be in a very bad state and their widows in a similar bad state, and that really it is a disgraceful thing that people who, in many instances, have served for so many years should, even in the few instances that are left, be treated in this way?

Lord PEART

My Lords, may I say this in reply to my noble friend: After all, we were asked to do this and we have done it; the Prime Minister has done this. What more do noble Lords want?

Lord BOOTHBY

An Answer from Lord Boyle. When—1993?

Lord PEART

The noble Lord, Lord Boothby, was against it.