HL Deb 05 April 1984 vol 450 cc796-7

3.14 p.m.

Lord Stallard

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

The Question was as follows:

To ask Her Majesty's Government what progress has been made in reaching agreement with the Canadian Government about a reciprocal agreement to increase the payment of pensions to United Kingdom citizens now domiciled in Canada.

Baroness Trumpington

My Lords, officials of the two Governments have been engaged in technical discussions about the possible basis of a future more comprehensive social security convention between the United Kingdom and Canada. These discussions are continuing.

Lord Stallard

My Lords, I thank the noble Baroness for that reply, although I am not entirely satisfied at the progress that has been made. Is she aware that those pensioners referred to in my Question, all of whom have qualified in the normal way for a United Kingdom retirement pension, will not understand why we have not been able to make more progress in reaching a reciprocal agreement with Canada when we have been able to make agreements with 25 other countries including non-Commonwealth countries like Austria, Bermuda, the United States of America, Turkey and Yugoslavia, to name a few, and Commonwealth countries like Cyprus, Malaysia, Malta and Jamaica? Why do we appear to be discrim-inating against our kith and kin in Canada in this dilatory approach to reaching a reciprocal agreement with the Canadian Government which has expressed willingness on a number of occasions to reach such an agreement?

Baroness Trumpington

My Lords, in answer to the first part of the noble Lord's question, successive governments have taken the view that our social security system is designed primarily for people living in this country. The cost of increasing pensions falls mainly on contributors and employers here and it would be unreasonable to ask them to bear the cost of increases paid to people who have left the country.

In answer to the second part of the noble Lord's question, it is perfectly true that, as a result of the United Kingdom's commitments under the Treaty of Rome, full unfreezing applies to pensioners anywhere in the EC. In addition, increases are payable in various other European countries under conventions between the United Kingdom and the country concerned, but these latter conventions are for the most part long-standing.

Baroness Jeger

My Lords, while accepting that these anomalies have persisted under successive governments, does not the noble Baroness understand that, while she is affirming that these pensions should apply to people in this country, it is very difficult for Canadians to understand why there are 26 other countries including the United States of America which are exempt from these restrictions? Can she also confirm that pensioners from the Civil Service and the armed forces are allowed to receive their upgradings wherever they decide to live?

Baroness Trumpington

My Lords, with regard to the first part of the noble Baroness's question, the question of the United States of America is a different one from that on the Order Paper. With regard to the second part of her remarks, I have listened with interest.

Lord Banks

My Lords, can the noble Baroness say whether there is any particular difficulty that is preventing agreement being reached with Canada?

Baroness Trumpington

My Lords, as I said at the beginning, conversations are still continuing.

Baroness Gardner of Parkes

My Lords, can my noble friend inform me whether similar consultations are continuing with Australia, in view of previous answers given in this House that there are even more people in this category in Australia than in Canada?

Baroness Trumpington

My Lords, in answer to my noble friend, Australia does not appear in the Question on the Order Paper.

Lord Hatch of Lusby

My Lords, does the noble Baroness recall that I asked a similar Question some months ago and was told that this was a question of Government expenditure? Are the pensions that are due to pensioners who, for example, go to stay or to live with their children in Canada not their own money—money that has been contributed throughout their working lives? Is it not another example of this Government's meanness towards the poorer sections of the community that they are not allowed to draw their full pension if they emigrate to a country like Canada?

Baroness Trumpington

My Lords, no.