Greg Pope

[Owd Bert]

I would like to ask Accywebbers to send an email to our MP congratulating him for voting against the proposal to compensate people affected by the Pension fiasco. It it far more important to use the money for buying presents etc to encourage pupils to attend to their studies in a more diligent manner.

[entwisi]

Perhaps Greg would like to comment on here as he quite often does.

So, go on Greg, what reasons made you feel you should oppose this?

[Wynonie Harris]

Now, now, Bert, you must realise that there are far more important things to be paid for. For instance, our military presence in Iraq which is enabling the Iraqi people to live in peace and prosperity...then, there's the wonderful new all-singing, all-dancing IT system for the NHS (current cost: £12.4 billion)..oh, and so much more! Let's have a sense of priority here!!

[entwisi]

Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris

Now, now, Bert, you must realise that there are far more important things to be paid for. For instance, our military presence in Iraq which is enabling the Iraqi people to live in peace and prosperity...then, there's the wonderful new all-singing, all-dancing IT system for the NHS (current cost: £12.4 billion)..oh, and so much more! Let's have a sense of priority here!!

Can you take your tongue out your cheek, I can't quite hear what your saying

[Greg Pope]

Thanks for giving me the opportunity to explain why I voted against the amendments to the Pensions Bill in the Commons yesterday. It is implicit in Owd Bert's post that this was public money that I voted against spending, but this is not the case. The Conservative amendments proposed compensating some people who have suffered from the collapse of private pension funds by taking hundreds of millions of pounds out of other private pension funds. To be fair to the Conservatives they said that they would only use what are known as 'unclaimed pension assets', but as the Association of British Insurers pointed out these assets are not surplus to requirements as in the end all assets are used to pay out actual pensions. The ABI went on to say in a letter to MPs that the amendments would be like robbing Peter to pay Paul and would have serious and damaging consequences for pensioners. In the light of that advice I voted against the amendments and they were defeated.

[Tealeaf]

I wonder if the Right Honourable Member for Hyndburn would care to detail the substancial increases in publicaly funded pension provisions for MP's that have been voted through in the last 10 years, and possibly inform us of his record in this matter?

[MargaretR]

It's good to know that our MP spares the time to visit here.

[SPUGGIE J]

I have sympathy for those that lost their pensions when companies went bust. I have a company private pension which like most private set ups (ours has private consultants) there is a risk of it going down as well as up. As govements in the past in a some what nieve way "ignored" company practices around pensions we need stronger and tougher laws to seperate pensions completely from firms so that the funds are not used as a "rescue fund" in the same way NI payments have been by Govenments since there inception. Whether we will have totally independant company pensions is debatable but if you are willingto gamble on making a sacrifice today for the sake of life tommorow then let there be solid protection. We cannot afford to bail out these people by "technical redistribution of funds" from one area to another without a net loss of investments.

[WillowTheWhisp]

Originally Posted by SPUGGIE J

we need stronger and tougher laws to seperate pensions completely from firms so that the funds are not used as a "rescue fund" in the same way NI payments have been by Govenments since there inception.

That would be a good start Spuggie - and then perhaps the NI could be brought into line too? Or would that be too much to even dream of?

[Owd Bert]

Originally Posted by Greg Pope

The ABI went on to say in a letter to MPs that the amendments would be like robbing Peter to pay Paul and would have serious and damaging consequences for pensioners. In the light of that advice I voted against the amendments and they were defeated.

For starters let me say that you were correct in assuming I was thinking in terms of Public Money.

Secondly, as I assume you will agree, it is sensible to accept the views of the "experts" ie: the above mentioned ABI. This you did. What a pity that Gordon Brown didn`t take the the "experts" advice 10 years ago.

Now what about the serious and damaging consequences as applied to the current batch of victims ? Can I assume that Public Money, which seems to readily available when you lot ( ie: the Right Honourable members at the Palace of Westminster ) want a rise, will be used ?