Pensions Bill

That is a separate issue. We have debated how that works. We are dealing here with situations where people are in employment. The argument is about aggregating those employments so that people become eligible to get credits for the basic state pension and S2P. We must have fairness between people who have one job which is above the limit and those who have two jobs which together are above the limit. We believe that in each case the employer and the employee should be put in the same position. These burdens might also make the cost of hiring someone uncertain. The employer would not necessarily know about other jobs the individual might have, and therefore whether they would need to pay some employer’s national insurance contributions. Some small employers, offering just a few hours work a week, might be reluctant to employ anyone who had another job, which would make it more difficult for people, particularly women, to find part-time jobs which would fit around their other commitments. Were it to be possible to collect national insurance contributions on the aggregated earnings, some people could actually be worse off than they are now. We need to be mindful of that. More of the women who are earning more than the LEL in aggregate, but are not now paying contributions, are accruing state pension by other means than the 15,000 who are not. We believe that some 20,000 women are involved. It would not be possible to treat the two groups differently. All these women would have to pay contributions if they earned more than £100 a week, and 20,000 of them would already be accruing entitlement to the basic state pension. It is right that we should try to understand who will be retiring without a full basic state pension, and what the circumstances are that have led to that situation before we bring forward proposals to solve a diminishing problem. That is exactly why we are undertaking research to establish more information about those who do not qualify for the full basic state pension. Indeed we are going further than that and are looking also at those who will retire in 2025.We hope to publish the results of this research in summer 2007. It would not be appropriate for the Secretary of State to propose a solution on aggregation until we have the results of ongoing work to analyse the full non-accruals picture and the relationship between low earners and the tax and NICs systems. I therefore urge the noble Baroness to withdraw the amendment.