§ Mr. Gordon Brownasked the Secretary of State for Social Services what would the single pension and married pension be if they had kept pace with the rise in average earnings since 1979; how this compares with the actual level of pensions in 1985–86 and 1986–87; and what would be the first-year and full-year costs of an increase in pension so as to restore the link with earnings (a) net of the cost of indexation and (b) net of the cost of indexation and savings on other benefits as a direct result of restoration of earnings/pension link.
§ Mr. Newton[pursuant to his reply, 26 February 1986, c. 605]: Had retirement pension been increased in line with the rise in average earnings since November 1978, the rates for single and married pensioners that would have come into effect in November 1985, based on the movement of earnings to May 1985, would have been as follows:
November 1985 Single £ Married £ Actual benefit rates 38.30 61.30 Rates if link to earnings retained 39.65 63.45 The cost of the extra increase would have been £200 million in 1985–86 and £575 million in a full year. The cost after allowing for saving on other benefits would have been £150 million in 1985–86 and £450 million in full year.
388WThe July 1986 uprating will be based on the movement of prices to January 1986. Corresponding figures for the movement of earnings over this period are not yet available.
§ Mr. Gordon Brownasked the Secretary of State for Social Services what would be the first-year and full-year cost of increases in the single and married pensions in 1985–86 and 1986–87 by £1, £5, £8 and 10 per week (a) inclusive of the cost of indexation, (b) net of the cost of indexation and (c) net of the cost of indexation and savings in other benefit payments as a direct result of these pension increases.
§ Mr. Newton[pursuant to his reply, 26 February 1986, c. 605]: The estimated costs of increasing retirement pension in November 1985 by the amounts shown would have been as follows:
- (a) inclusive of the cost of increasing retirement pension in line with the retail prices index;
- (b) after deducting the cost of the increase in line with the retail prices index;
- (c) after deducting the cost of the increase in line with the retail prices index, and also allowing for savings on other benefits.
£ million (a) (b) (c) *Amount of increase 1985–86 1986–87 1985–86 1986–87 1985–86 1986–87 £1 170 480 †-200 †-600 †-150 †-450 £5 850 2,400 450 1,300 300 900 £8 1,350 3,850 950 2,750 650 1,900 £10 1,700 4,800 1,300 3,700 900 2,600 * The increase is assumed to apply both to the personal rate of retirement pension and to the rate for adult dependants and married women dependent on their husband's insurance. † The cost of a £l increase is less than the cost of increasing retirement pension in line with the retail prices index. The estimated costs of increasing retirement pension by these amounts in July 1986 are as follows:
£ million (a) (b) (c) *Amount of increase 1986–87 1987–88 1986–87 1987–88 1986–87 1987–88 £1 320 480 200 300 140 220 £5 1,600 2,400 1,500 2,200 1,000 1,500 £8 2,550 3,850 2,450 3,650 1,700 2,500 £10 3,200 4,800 3,100 4,600 2,300 3,400 * The increase is assumed to apply both to the personal rate of retirement pension and to the rate for adult dependants and married women dependent on their husband's insurance.