---

Occupational Pensions

I am grateful to my hon. Friend, who has had constituents who have not lived to see compensation from the financial assistance scheme because of delays in the system. The administration has cost £9 million, and only £3 million has been paid out. There are great difficulties with the FAS as opposed to the Pension Protection Fund. I hope that we can make substantial progress on the issue tomorrow. The Chancellor has not been straightforward, open and transparent about his tax increases on pension funds, and the same applies in relation to the funding of the financial assistance scheme and the way in which the information was released. It was extraordinary to hear him saying how pleased he was that it had been released after he had—for reasons that I can understand, to some extent—fought it for two years. As a member of the Treasury Committee, I was particularly frustrated by the fact that it was released on the Friday after Parliament had gone into recess, as that was the day after he had given evidence to the Committee. We could have had the opportunity to grill him on the matter in much greater detail even than on an event such as today’s debate. It comes down to the same thing all the way through. The Chancellor fails to provide open and transparent answers but is evasive and, at times, sneaky. He claims, as a Chancellor, to be interested in the long term, but attacking pension funds is as short-termist as one can get. He claims, as a Chancellor, to be caring and compassionate, but he has done very little for the 125,000 workers exposed to losing their occupational pension funds. I hope that the House will do something for them tomorrow.