HL Deb 10 July 1990 vol 521 cc111-2

Lord Stallard asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether they have completed consideration of the European Court judgment of 17th May 1990 in the case of Barber v. Guardian Royal Exchange Group on the issue of payment of redundancy benefits (including pensions) on an equal basis to both sexes; and what proposals they have for the implementation of the judgment.

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Social Security (Lord Henley)

My Lords, I am afraid that I have nothing to add to what I said on the Third Reading of the Social Security Bill. We are still considering the implications of a judgment that is unclear. I should also emphasise that individual schemes should seek their own legal advice on each scheme's individual circumstances.

Lord Stallard

My Lords, I thank the Minister for that reply. He must be aware that although governments come and governments go, that kind of reply goes on for ever. Does he agree that the Barber judgment makes a very important difference in so far as there is a relationship between occupational pension schemes and the state scheme? Will he accept that because of that relationship, it is now becoming more urgent and certainly more imperative that the Government should announce their plans to equalise the ages in the state pension scheme so that employers and the managers and trustees of occupational schemes can begin to plan the future of the schemes in the light of that judgment?

Lord Henley

My Lords, I do not think that I can go further. I do not accept that it is necessary for the Government to rush into precipitous decisions on equalisation in the state pension scheme. I shall continue to say as regards the particular judgment that we await legal advice and will again consider the matter when we have obtained it. Until then I can recommend only that individual schemes and their trustees should seek their own legal advice.

Baroness Turner of Camden

My Lords, I thank the Minister for that reply which is very similar to the response that he made to the discussion on the Social Security Bill. Has he no further information for us on bridging pensions, an issue which it has become necessary to raise only because of a recent European directive and because we have unequal pension ages in this country? Can he give us any further information about that matter?

Lord Henley

My Lords, I am afraid that I cannot. The problem is one for clarification. The Government are unable to clarify the European Court's judgment.

It is up to the court itself to clarify that judgment, and the means by which we can find a way of going to the court to clarify the judgment are necessarily limited.

Lord Allen of Abbeydale

My Lords, does the Minister agree that the judgment emphasises the need to come to a decision about the state pension age? At one stage it looked as though the Government were in favour of a decade of retirement, but we have heard no more of that. Does he further agree that the change, when it comes, will be bound to take some years before it is fully implemented and that it is very frustrating and difficult not even to know what the starting point will be?

Lord Henley

My Lords, I answered that point when I replied to the noble Lord, Lord Stallard. I do not believe that we should be rushed into precipitous decisions on equalising the state pension scheme as a result of the court judgment.

Lord Allen of Abbeydale

My Lords, no one could say that the decision will be precipitous.

Lord Stallard

My Lords, the noble Lord did not answer my Question. I pointed out the relationship between occupational schemes and the state scheme. It is a definite relationship. To a large extent occupational schemes depend on the state scheme and since they will now—certainly yesterday's Question Time pointed in this direction—have to implement the Barber judgment, does he not feel that they are entitled to have a lead from the Government on what to do about the other part of the pension, namely, the state scheme? It is not a question of rushing into anything or asking employers to obtain their own legal advice. The occupational schemes can get legal advice on the Barber judgment. But is the Minister not aware that what they want is advice from the Government on the state scheme?

Lord Henley

My Lords, I accept the link, as I said in answer to the noble Baroness, Lady Turner. But I do not believe that the Government can rush in. We have to clarify what the European Court means before we can make a decision.

Back to