---

Occupational Pensions

I think that the hon. Gentleman prepared those comments before he had the opportunity to read my statement. I have made it clear today that we are carefully considering all aspects of the ruling in the High Court case. We have been given leave to appeal, but I have made it clear that we have not yet come to a decision on what the grounds for that appeal will be. That is in accordance with perfectly normal legal process in such cases, so the hon. Gentleman should not read anything into that. I am not in a position to give any further details today about what the grounds for the appeal might be, because they are still the subject of consultation between Ministers, and between the parties to the case. On a more general level, we are considering every aspect of the ruling, but I get the strong sense from the hon. Gentleman that he wishes to pick and choose which aspects of the judgment he wants us to endorse, and which not. We are not in a position to do that. I cannot promise the hon. Gentleman that I will be able to return to the House with proposals in the time scale that he mentioned. I will do my very best, but there are wider implications that I have to take into account, not least the current and ongoing litigation in relation to the European Court of Justice case. We have been frank and open about costs. That was recognised by the judge in the Court yesterday— ...It certainly was. The judge made it clear that the issue was presentational, not substantive, and that it did not affect the substance of the matter in any way, shape or form. ...If the hon. Gentleman is shaking his head, he needs to go away and look at the judgment, where those points are made in terms, as I have outlined to the House today.