Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Freud (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 1 March 2011. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee proceeding on Pensions Bill [HL].


Pensions Bill [HL]

My Lords, I really am grateful to the noble Lord for giving me this incredible opportunity to talk about PUCODIs. I have to quote the noble Lord himself from 2007, when he said: "““This is a technical area and, despite the hour, I hope that the Committee will bear with me as I explain””.—[Official Report, 4/6/07; col. 875.]" He then gave an explanation, but I am convinced that, to his disgrace, he has forgotten every single word that he said to the Committee. The essential point regarding the payable uprated contracted-out deduction increment is that these payments are very small. As the noble Lord pointed out, 77 per cent of recipients get less than £1 per week. Where it is in payment, it represents 0.6 per cent, on average, of an individual state pension income. Most of the people in receipt are women—93,000 out of 118,000 people are women—and the average received by women is slightly higher than by men. Bluntly, though, both are around 20p per week. Around 6,000 of the 9,000 in receipt of inherited awards are women. The average received by women is again similar to men: around 30p per week. The original policy intention of the PUCODI was to ensure parity between those who were contracted out, and those who were not. However, as noble Lords will be aware, contracting-out on a defined contribution basis is being abolished from April 2012. The proposed abolition of new awards of PUCODIs for members of such schemes is linked to the abolition of defined contribution contracting-out. I shall not go into the detail of the timings, except to assure the noble Lord that it has never been the Government’s intention to bring the proposed legislation into force before 6 April 2012. I am not sure that I have a reliable spread, although I am very happy to write making clear what the spread of payments is. However, given the averages we are talking about, there are going to be fairly few outliers. The point is that, as the name suggests, there is an element of choice for people when they take them. They are delaying payment of their contracted-out pension, and there is therefore an element of choice. If the loss is too much, they can start to take it, so there is an element of market balance for the outliers. I will write about that very specific point beyond the averages. As the noble Lord said in his introduction, it is not his intention to do anything more than find out some of this detail, and I am sure that he will be pleased to withdraw the amendment.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
725 c149-50GC 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Disability Carers Age Women Employment Equality Health Eligibility Employees' contributions Employers' contributions Ethnic groups Earnings rules Pension credit Personal income Workplace pensions Pensions Part-time employment Social security benefits State retirement pensions Life expectancy National employment savings trust scheme
Legislation
Pensions Bill (HL) 2010-12
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk