Showing posts with label Minister. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Minister. Show all posts

Sunday, June 19, 2011

Minister denies pension 'assault'

17 June 2011 Last updated at 17:04 GMT Danny Alexander: "I think that's a very fair and balanced offer"

Treasury minister Danny Alexander has said plans for public sector pensions will "protect them for the long term".

In a speech in London he said proposals were "not an assault" on pensions and accused some unions of spreading "scare stories" about government plans.

Contributions will rise and some people will have to work for longer but the low paid would be protected, he said.

But unions said the timing of the speech, while they negotiate over changes, was "deeply inflammatory".

The two sides have been holding negotiations over pensions but tensions have risen in recent days after unions representing up to 750,000 public sector workers voted to strike on 30 June.

On Friday the National Association of Head Teachers said it would also ballot its members about striking over pension cuts.

Chief Secretary to the Treasury Mr Alexander said he was making the speech on Friday because the issue had been getting "a lot of public attention" and accused a minority of unions "hell bent on premature strike action" of misrepresenting the government's position.

Continue reading the main story Sector Employee contribution Pension age

*Depending on scheme. Source: IPSPC

In his speech he confirmed the government would adopt many of the recommendations on pension reform made in the Hutton report in March.

He acknowledged the issue of pension was "sensitive", particularly at a time of widespread job cuts and a pay freeze across the public sector, but said public servants could not be "insulated" from the economic pressures facing society as a whole.

He said the government was proposing that public sector workers - bar the armed forces, police and fire service - would receive their occupational pension at the same time as the state pension in future.

Many can currently receive a full pension at 60. The state pension age is due to rise to 66 for both men and women by April 2020.

Under government plans, workers - on average - would have to pay 3.2% more in annual pension contributions phased in between 2012 and 2014.

But low-paid public sector workers on less than ?15,000 would not face any increase in contributions and those earning less than ?18,000 would have their contributions capped at 1.5%.

And he insisted all pension benefits earned before any reforms are introduced - including retirement ages and final salary benefits - would be protected.

In his final report in March, former Labour cabinet minister Lord Hutton concluded there was a "clear need for reform".

'Best deal'

He rejected any suggestion that public sector pensions were "gold-plated" but said in order to make them affordable in future, millions of employees should work longer, receive less and have their pensions linked to career average earnings, rather than final salaries.

Continue reading the main story image of Ross Hawkins Ross Hawkins Political correspondent, BBC News

After months of negotiations with trade unions behind closed doors, the government feared its message was being misrepresented and wanted to make its case direct to the public.

But as news of the speech emerged last night, union leaders were furious.

It was not the eye-catching language referring to some as "hell bent" on premature strikes that most angered them.

It was the clear statement of detailed policy that unions felt undermined negotiations.

While Danny Alexander characterised his plans as proposals, the government is understood to regard them as the core principles of any package.

It points out the basis of reform has long been established, in Lord Hutton's review of pensions and earlier Treasury announcements.

Privately, some in Whitehall regard the trade union reaction as predictable sabre rattling.

But union leaders argue this speech has left much less room for negotiation, and made widespread industrial action more likely.

Mr Alexander suggested the government's offer, based on the Hutton recommendations, was "by far the best likely to be on the table for years to come" and it was "unjustifiable to ask the taxpayer to work longer and pay more so that public sector workers can retire earlier and receive more themselves".

"This is not an assault on public sector pensions but an attempt to protect them for the long term," he stressed.

He urged union leaders to re-engage in what had been "constructive" talks - suggesting there was a "great deal" to discuss on transitional arrangements to the new system and support for local government workers, many of whom are contracted out to the private sector.

"I think engaging in this conversation we are having is the best way rather than going to the barricades," he said.

But Brian Strutton, of the GMB union, said he was worried Mr Alexander was "determined" to drive the plans through irrespective of union backing.

He told the minister: "All of the items you have spoken about you presented to us a couple of weeks ago as discussion points. Today you present them as your formal proposals in the public domain outside of our negotiating process.

"How are you going to convince me that our negotiations are still alive and you are not actually almost scuppering them today?".

TUC General Secretary Brendan Barber added: "At such a critical time in complex negotiations this is a deeply inflammatory public intervention."

'Flawed'

And Chris Keates, head of the largest teachers' union, NASUWT, accused Mr Alexander of "political game playing".

"It is a flawed, high-risk strategy which has the potential to undermine confidence in the negotiations at a time when some progress was being made and there are still many crucial issues to be debated," she said.

Labour leader Ed Miliband said the government was "hopelessly mismanaging" the issue, accusing it of pre-empting the findings of the Hutton report and then "shouting from the rooftops" at workers.

"What people want the government to do is to get round the table and sort this out on the basis of negotiation not on the basis of megaphone diplomacy," he said.


View the original article here

Tuesday, June 14, 2011

Irish bail-out minister Lenihan dies

10 June 2011 Last updated at 10:41 GMT Brian Lenihan Brian Lenihan had been suffering from pancreatic cancer since the end of 2009 Former Irish finance minister Brian Lenihan has died at the age of 52.

Mr Lenihan, who was suffering from pancreatic cancer, was a member of the Fianna Fail opposition party.

As finance minister, he agreed the 100% bank guarantee and signed the bail-out deal with the IMF, the European Union and the European Central Bank.

He was a member of a political dynasty with his father Brian, his brother Conor, and his aunt Mary O'Rourke all serving in Irish governments.

Mr Lenihan had been fighting cancer since December 2009.

He had undergone intensive chemotherapy and radiotherapy treatment at the Mater Hospital in Dublin.

He had served as minister for justice and as the minister for children in previous Fianna Fail administrations.

Continue reading the main story Jim Fitzpatrick Economics and business editor

No finance minister in the history of the Irish state had ever experienced an economic crisis of the magnitude that confronted Brian Lenihan in 2008.

Because of the collapse in the global property market and the ridiculous amounts the Irish banks had lent, they were effectively bankrupt.

Mr Lenihan had to find a way of preventing the Irish economy simply collapsing. He chose to guarantee the deposits of all Irish banks, thereby also underwriting their huge debts.

It was a move supported by all major parties in the Republic. But it was a step into the unknown that has left Irish taxpayers burdened by unprecedented debt that may yet prove too costly to repay.

His legacy will be forever tied to that decision and its consequences which continue to define Ireland's current economic plight.

Since Fianna Fail left government in March, he had continued to act as Fianna Fail finance spokesperson.

He is survived by his wife and two children.

The Irish prime minister Enda Kenny said Mr Lenihan had been exemplary in carrying out his public duties.

"He exemplified a great sense of humanity in the public representation he gave.

"I'd like to say I've known Brian Lenihan for many years and regard him as a friend in politics."

Mrs O'Rourke told Irish state broadcaster RTE: "It's all over. It's kind of unbelievable.

"He always worked for his country and he worked for the best of Ireland and I suppose in the end what anybody in public life would wish to do, and that's what he did.

"I just feel my life has almost ended, I really do."

Fianna Fail leader Micheal Martin said he was "deeply saddened" by Mr Lenihan's death.

"Brian has fought a brave and courageous battle with a serious illness over the past 18 months," he added.

"In all of this time, Brian never once flinched from his public duties and he showed an unceasing and untiring commitment to tackling the economic crisis facing this country."


View the original article here

Thursday, June 2, 2011

Minister attacks pension transfer

23 May 2011 Last updated at 09:57 GMT Steve Webb The Pensions Minister Steve Webb says he may ban pension transfer incentives The Pensions Minister Steve Webb says employers must stop tricking people into giving up valuable pension rights.

He is worried about the increasing use of cash incentives to lure people into moving their pensions elsewhere, or to give up inflation proofing.

He will warn pension industry representatives, at a private meeting, that he may ban these practices.

The Pensions Regulator has already warned several times about the perils of such inducements.

In 2007, 2008 and 2009 the regulator issued guidance to pension scheme trustees, warning them to assume that transfer incentive schemes were probably not in the interests of scheme members.

However they appear to have become more common as companies have tried to crystallize or offload some of the costs of running their schemes.

"People do not understand what they are doing and in many cases are making the wrong choice," Mr Webb told the BBC.

"If people are giving up good pension rights, at a price that isn't ultimately fair to them that is not acceptable," he added.

Limited powers

Despite the concern of the regulator and now the government, there is little that can be done at the moment by trustees or anyone else to stop employers making these inducements.

Continue reading the main story
Compound interest means their pension could fall by a quarter or more if they give up inflation protection”

End Quote Steve Webb Pensions Minister The offers may operate outside the rules of a scheme, thus eliminating the power of the trustees to act, and may not break any laws.

The incentives can come in a variety of different forms.

They may be enhancements to transfer values, or straight cash payments, to those who have left employment but yet to retire, to move their deferred pensions elsewhere.

Or they can be offers of cash or enhanced pensions, in return for giving up future inflation proofing.

"[This] can look like a good deal when you are offered a cash lump sum, but people forget they will be retired for 20 or 30 years - compound interest means their pension could fall by a quarter or more if they give up inflation protection," said Mr Webb, the Lib Dem MP for Thornbury and Yate.

The employers' organisation the CBI said it was wrong to believe that all transfer incentives were bad.

"The Pensions Regulator would be best bearing down on situations where it's clear that transfer offers are not in a pension holder's interests, or when either poor or no independent advice has been offered," the CBI said.

"The deal many policyholders get from good [transfer incentive] offers is often attractive," it added.


View the original article here