---

Pensions Bill

I thank my noble friend for that sympathetic response. There was an acceptance of the view that people working on physically exhausting, sometimes dangerous, work should not be expected to continue to work to a late age without some relief or provision made for them. There is a general acceptance from everybody that something should be done about the situation. I thank the noble Lord, Lord Fowler, who also made that point. I also thank my noble friends who participated in the debate, particularly my noble friend Lady Hollis, who drew attention to the report on longevity. She simply confirmed what the TUC said in its briefing to me when it argued that, "““differences in life expectancy mean that an across-the-board increase in the pension age would affect the poor the most””." We are talking about the poor; manual employment is not always poor employment or physically exhausting. The statistics that have been cited about manual employees and longevity are understandable. We are talking not about all manual employment, simply that which is exhausting and possibly dangerous. I am very grateful for the assurances that have been given this evening. I accepted, when I moved the amendment, that its wording was not particularly good. I crafted it so that we could have a debate; I certainly was not wedded to the wording and hoped that if the idea behind it was accepted by Ministers, they might come back with their own. Instead I have had assurances that are acceptable and on that basis, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. Clause 13 agreed to.