Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Mike O'Brien (Labour) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 22 April 2008. It occurred during Debate on bill on Pensions Bill.


Pensions Bill

I would give a comprehensive answer to the hon. Gentleman, but that would take an awfully long time. I am afraid that there have been lengthy negotiations with the armed forces, for example, about whether they wanted to be included or not. The Ministry of Defence has had various discussions with us at different stages. Our original view was that it would be better for the armed forces to be in, but now we have taken the view that they want to be out. In respect of the long-term impact, I should say that all the armed forces sign up to the pension scheme anyway. That scheme works very well and we do not want to mess with it. If the MOD wants this exemption, I am happy to go along with that. Broadly, I try to deal with the issues raised in relation to the Bill by looking at them on their merits. Over a period, we have seen that the views of some of the stakeholders have changed. That is the case with the armed forces, and I am happy with the position that we have now got to. With the police, there was the issue about the definition and whether they were workers or not, and we have taken the view reflected in the new clause.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
474 c1192-3 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Conditions of employment Cadets Investment Police Workplace pensions Pensions Public service Means-tested benefits Uprating Personal Accounts Delivery Authority National employment savings trust scheme Pensions Regulator
Legislation
Pensions Bill 2007-08
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk