I want only to make a very brief intervention. It seems to me that there would be difficulty with the unions as far as this amendment is concerned, because public sector pensions generally speaking are the result of collective bargaining with the relevant unions. Moreover, for many years unions have traditionally regarded pension provision as deferred pay, and I am sure that there would be opposition to the notionof a special commission designed to look at and, presumably, to report on public sector pensions.
A lot has been said about the private sector. Of course, it is not so very long ago that the private sector produced very good pensions. We used tobe very proud of our occupational pension arrangements in this country compared with those abroad, because we felt that we had a very good scheme—and many private firms offered very good pension provision. Unfortunately, as we know, for all sorts of reasons that is no longer the situation, but it does not seem to me that this requires a new commission specifically to look at public sector pensions when bargaining with unions has already taken place to produce the situation that we now have. I hope that the Government will not feel that it is appropriate to enter into the kind of arrangements suggested in this amendment.
Pensions Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Turner of Camden
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 11 June 2007.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Pensions Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
692 c1561-2 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 11:47:58 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_401845
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_401845
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_401845