Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from John Penrose (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 22 April 2008. It occurred during Debate on bill on Pensions Bill.


Pensions Bill

I understand what the Minister has said about commercial confidentiality preventing him from saying too much about costs, but may I press him a little further on the matter? If PADA has done enough detailed work to know that the timings involved can be achieved, at least in theory, it must also have made some estimates of the costs involved. I appreciate that there could be commercial ramifications if we were to go into the detail of those costs, but will he offer the House some reassurances that the total costs being considered are not wildly different from the numbers that have been projected? It is important that the House understands that, because if the numbers are twice or three times as high as those in the projections, to choose a deliberately extreme example, the implications for the long-term overall costs of the scheme will be negative and very serious. Will the Minister at least give us the basic assurance that there are no show-stoppingly large and unexpected figures in the plans that he has seen so far?


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
474 c1208 
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