---

Pensions Bill

As my hon. Friend says, one would have to be cynical to take that view. I could not possibly comment, save to point out the historical fact that one of the myths surrounding the earnings link is that pensioners were worse off for ever after 1980 because their pensions were not going up in line with earnings, whereas there were years when prices were roaring ahead, until we got them under control. If there is a legitimate reason for holding up this announcement, it can be only because of the Government's worries about the economic and fiscal future over the coming months and years. They have done their sums on what all this would cost; those figures are in the public domain and have been for some time. If Ministers now feel that it will not be affordable because of other problems in the economy, they should come clean, as well as telling us why they will not make the announcement at this precise moment. There is so much consensus on this issue that there is almost identical drafting between our new clause 7 and new clause 16, which was tabled by the hon. Member for Newcastle upon Tyne, Central (Jim Cousins), among others. On reflection, I am more attracted to his new clause than my own. It was my intention, subject to what else might be said in the debate, to withdraw new clause 7, but to seek, if possible, to press new clause 16 to a Division. I will be interested to hear whether the hon. Gentleman is sufficiently reassured by the honeyed words of the Minister not to wish to press new clause 16, but even if he were, perhaps I may say at this stage that I would intend to seek permission to do so myself.