My point is that whatever was done in the direction that the hon. Gentleman suggests, we would still have means-testing in the system. His proposal, which might end up being more modest than the one that I have read out, would cost £20 billion and increase income tax by 5p, but it would reduce the proportion of people on means-tested benefits in retirement by only a quarter. He knows very well that he would thus be in the same position on automatic enrolment. He wants to be able to say that he would increase the basic state pension, but he knows full well that that would not deal with the issue that he has identified.
Pensions Bill
Proceeding contribution from
James Purnell
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 18 April 2007.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Pensions Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
459 c385 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 12:38:43 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_390302
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_390302
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_390302