Proceeding contribution from Jonathan Evans (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Monday, 20 June 2011. It occurred during Debate on bill on Pensions Bill (Lords).
Pensions Bill [Lords]
I am aware that the Forum of Private Business does not like the fact that the Government have not made more adjustments in this area, and of course the Government would like to have a situation in which all parties were on board at the end of the review, but the proposal of the right hon. Member for Birmingham, Hodge Hill has virtually no supporters, save perhaps for those within the union movement—surprise, surprise. The reality is that the proposals we are taking forward are overdue, but there has been too much misinformation about this change. Ultimately, I want to see a situation in which no woman has to wait more than a year longer than she had expected to wait, but the linking of that issue with a 25-year lead-in to the equalisation of pensions at 65 by those engaged in this campaign has been deliberately misleading and has not served the interests of all the people who have written to us.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 530 c65
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Age Contributions Capital rules Women Judges Personal savings Low incomes Workplace pensions Pensions State retirement pensions Reform Tax allowances Retirement Uprating
- Legislation
- Pensions Bill (HL) 2010-12
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 16:32:19 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_750564
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_750564
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_750564