Proceeding contribution from Grahame Morris (Labour) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 1 March 2012. It occurred during Backbench debate and e-petition debate on CPI/RPI Pensions Uprating.
CPI/RPI Pensions Uprating
I am grateful for that point of clarification. By my arithmetic, that makes two judges out of three, which is a majority. That strengthens the argument that the Government should at least be honest that this measure is not designed around fairness but is placing the cost of deficit reduction, or cuts in public expenditure—whatever terminology one uses—on to public sector pensioners instead of looking for an alternative. As my hon. Friends have said, there is a simple alternative. The case for more cuts to pensions and public services has now been lost on the back of evidence that growth in our economy has been falling for two years and unemployment continues to rise. The Chancellor himself has indicated that we are borrowing £158 billion more than he originally anticipated. We need to offer people security in their jobs and in their retirement. The case put forward by Conservative Members, in particular—notably yesterday in a Westminster Hall debate—for rolling back workers' rights, as well as slashing pensions, was this week shown the red card by the Bank of England in an evidence session in a House Committee. No less a person than Sir Mervyn King said that making it easier for companies to sack staff would make no difference to his economic forecasts. Instead, we need to get the economy growing. We should be creating jobs to boost the economy, giving people job and pension security. From the perspective of the economy, the bonus—I am not referring to bankers' bonuses, because I do not think that those should be paid—is that that is more likely to cut the deficit. As my hon. Friend the Member for Bolton North East (Mr Crausby) indicated, many pensioners use that money directly in the local economy. Reducing pensions has an immediate negative effect in local economies and the national economy. To argue otherwise is disingenuous and, indeed, nonsense. Cutting jobs and pensions will damage the economy now and in the future. What is worse, it will increase the deficit. Like elsewhere in national policy, my view is that the Government have it wrong on this issue. We should be investing in housing and public transport. We should be looking at the issues that Labour set out in its five-point plan for jobs and growth. Given the news this week about tax avoidance and evasion, I think that we should be taking measures on that issue. I welcome the fact that the Government have closed one particular loophole, so that Barclays and others will have to pay their fair share of tax and not be able to dodge it. However, the Government are penalising pensioners before even asking about the millions that Vodafone is refusing to pay in taxes on the profits that it made from activities in this country. That is an absolute disgrace. In conclusion, the House should support the motion and send the message to the Government that their priorities are at best mixed up and at worst explicitly wrong. We should value the pensions that take care of our ageing population, and we should not put people off saving for their future.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 541 c478-9
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Civil service Judgements Local government NHS Police Workplace pensions Public sector Teachers Uprating Retail prices index Consumer prices index
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 15:52:46 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_813723
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_813723
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_813723