Asked by
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what consideration they will give
to the latest Office for National Statistics’ projections for (1)
life expectancy, and (2) healthy life expectancy, when reviewing
the state pension age.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Foreign, Commonwealth
and Development Office and Department for Work and Pensions
() (Con)
The department launched the second review on state pension age in
December 2021. It must be published by May 2023, in accordance
with Section 27 of the Pensions Act 2014. The review will be
informed by two independent reports and will consider a wide
range of evidence. This will include consideration of the latest
Office for National Statistics projections for life expectancy
and healthy life expectancy. Tempting though it is, we must wait
for the report to come out before we comment.
(Lab)
I thank the Minister for that response and the point she makes
that the ONS projections seem to confirm that life expectancy is
no longer increasing. As it is, the people most dependent on a
state pension are more likely to have a shorter life expectancy
than those with additional pension provision. Many will die
before they reach retirement age or will receive their state
pension for only a few years. Does the Minister accept that a
fair pension scheme must take account of the life expectancy and
healthy life expectancy of people in deprived areas—not just a
broad average across the board? Can she assure us that the
Government’s review of the state pension age will take that into
account?
(Con)
The noble Baroness makes a number of important points. We want a
fair pension system, and her points about life expectancy,
particularly in some of the poorer areas of the country, are
valid. On the review, I know that my noble friend Lady
Neville-Rolfe will want input from Members of this House who are
concerned and who have expertise, and I encourage the noble
Baroness to make sure that those points are made to my noble
friend when she carries out her review.
(Con)
Has my noble friend considered the conclusion of the Office for
National Statistics that:
“Over a 20-year period the estimated change in deaths associated
with warm or cold temperature was a net decrease of 555,103 … A
decrease in deaths from outcomes associated with cold temperature
greatly outnumbers deaths associated with warm temperature”?
Is it not good news that climate change has prolonged or saved
the lives of more than half a million of our fellow citizens—
Noble Lords
Oh!
(Con)
—a laughable matter to the Liberal Benches over there—and how
long does she expect this beneficial effect to continue?
(Con)
My noble friend has again given us some interesting facts and
data. I am afraid that the impact of climate change is way
outside my brief, but I am sure everybody notes the points
made.
(Lab)
My Lords, the Minister quite rightly referred to the ongoing
reviews, but I simply ask, as a matter of logic, that, if the
policy is that because people are living longer, retirement age
should increase, is it not the necessary corollary that if people
are not living as long as previously expected, retirement age
should not be increased in the same way?
(Con)
I will not argue with logic; that would not get me anywhere. On
the noble Lord’s point about the state pension age, I know that
people are sceptical of government reviews, but I ask all noble
Lords to approach it in a positive way, make their
points—particularly the one raised by the noble Lord—and get them
into the review.
(LD)
My Lords, around 1.5 million low-paid workers pay a 25% penalty
for their pension savings. When will the Government publish the
outcome of their call for evidence on pensions tax administration
to enable low-paid workers, who are typically women, to receive
pensions tax relief on their contributions?
(Con)
Many noble Lords have made this point, including the noble
Baroness, Lady Drake, and my noble friend Lady Altmann. The truth
is that I do not know when they will do it, but I will go back
and find out, and will write to the noble Baroness.
(Con)
My Lords, women are disproportionately affected by pensioner
poverty. What are the Government doing to support and help
them?
(Con)
Since 1994-95, rates of female pensioners in poverty, by all
measures, have fallen by a larger amount than rates of male
pensioners in poverty over the same period. The proportion of
pensioners in absolute poverty, after housing costs, has halved
since 2002-03. Pension credit is the safety net—I know that will
open the floodgates for a raft of other questions—and we must
make sure that as many people as possible apply for that
benefit.
(Lab)
My Lords, I cannot let that go: relative poverty among pensioners
is on the rise again, having fallen considerably for years.
However, controversially, I will come back to the Question. The
latest ONS tables show that life expectancy at birth in the UK is
79 for men and 83 for women. But life expectancy is lower in
Wales and Northern Ireland, and especially Scotland, than it is
in England. What are the Government doing to engage with the
devolved Administrations, and how might pension policy take
account of that?
(Con)
I hope that, during the review, the devolved Administrations will
be consulted. I will certainly go back to the department and
speak to the Secretary of State to make sure that that is
included in the review. The review will then report, and the
noble Baroness will get the answers that she is looking for.
(Con)
My Lords, I am delighted that my noble friend Lady Neville-Rolfe
will be leading an independent inquiry. Can my noble friend the
Minister assure the House that some flexibility in state pension
age will be considered for those who are not healthy and wealthy
enough to wait for the ever-rising state pension age? With a
significant, 20-year difference in healthy life expectancy across
the country, perhaps very long national insurance records might
be considered for early access to the state pension.
(Con)
As I have said many times, I cannot give any guarantees, but I am
absolutely sure that the points my noble friend raises about
flexibility and age will be included in the review. I urge her to
take part in that consultation.
(Lab)
My Lords, poorer people tend to die at a younger age than richer
people. Each increase in the state pension age effectively
results in a wealth transfer from the poor to the rich, who will
receive the pension for many more years. Can the Minister tell
the House why the Government have pursued pension policies that
penalise the poor and transfer wealth to the rich? Why this
reverse socialism for the rich?
(Con)
I doubt I will be able to convince the noble Lord, but nobody
wants pensioners to be in poverty and nobody wants to run a book
on transferring wealth from one place to the other. The noble
Lord raises a valid point. I know I am repeating myself, but it
is one that I expect will be in the review; knowing how much
knowledge the noble Lord has, especially on how to pay for these
things, I look for him to have input into the review.
(Con)
My Lords, in the last two years, life expectancy has been below
the expectancy of the industry. If that continues to be the case,
does it mean that slight pension increases could be afforded?
(Con)
I imagine that, if things go as my noble friend has just said,
that is a possibility, but I am not able to confirm it. Again, I
urge my noble friend, who has a raft of experience in this field,
to get his point into the review.
(Lab)
My Lords—
(CB)
I am grateful to the noble Lord and declare my interests as set
out in the register. Referring to the points made by the noble
Lord, , does the Minister agree that
the interaction between health and climate change really warrants
a more sophisticated analysis of all the factors involved, rather
than the assertions made by the noble Lord in his
intervention?
(Con)
I can assure the House that my noble friend Lady Neville-Rolfe
will pay due attention to the seriousness of the interaction
between the points the noble Baroness has raised. I have no doubt
that will happen.
