My Lords, I am sorry if I spoil the congratulatory party. My noble friend Lady Thomas has already put on record—and I am happy to do that, too—our thanks to the noble Baroness, Lady Hollis, for this campaign. However, under the circumstances and given the very great strength of feeling that there was on all sides of the House last year, this is a pretty disappointing outcome. I am afraid—the noble Lord, Lord Skelmersdale, made some of the same points—that the costs and prices are very unclear. Women are being offered a tempting meal, from a menu without prices, in a restaurant that they may not be able to afford. How can it be possible to remedy what we all agreed was a major injustice to women on a cost-neutral basis? Can we be told how much extra women will have to pay, over and above the increases that the noble Lord was talking about, so that this can be achieved on a cost-neutral basis? Who is going to pay? Will the cost of buying back these added years be prohibitive for women? What are the numbers? At the moment, women born before 5 April 1950 can make a voluntary class 3 contribution of £421 to buy an additional state pension worth £121 a year. That is clearly very good value. As noble Lords have already pointed out, in quite a few cases people will lose pensions credits. We must make sure that the advice gets through properly. In particular, what is the extra cost going to be?
I must comment on the way in which last week’s announcements were handled. There was no problem for James Purnell with the favourable publicity: he was there in the centre of the photograph when he was claiming credit. However, when there was any question of what the bill would be, he was airbrushed out. On a matter such as this, where feelings are so strong, I would have thought that the Government would have told us what the bill and the extra costs will be. The strength of feeling in this House and in the country is such that it is disappointing that the Government have been allowed to get away with taking the credit at no cost. We on these Benches would have been happy to support more money being put in. We think that, for women, this is at the moment a bit of a pig in a poke.
Pensions Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 29 October 2008.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Pensions Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
704 c1594-5 Session
2007-08Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-16 02:07:52 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_504630
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_504630
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_504630