Child Support, Pensions and Social Security Bill — Age additions — 3 Apr 2000
Mr Paul Marsden MP, Shrewsbury and Atcham voted with the majority (No).
Brought up, and read the First time.
I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.
Mr. Deputy Speaker:
With this it will be convenient to discuss new clause 36-- Annual increase in basic retirement pension --
During their years in government, the Tories learned that the more they tried to target benefit on the poorest, the more the social security budget grew. Our new clause aims to restore the incentive to top up the basic state provision with private provision and, in the long run, that will be the most effective and efficient way to spend public money. I beg to move new clause 36.
Mr. John McDonnell (Hayes and Harlington):
With some surprise, I, too, beg to move new clause 36, which stands in my name and in the names of many others, some of whom are on Council of Europe duty and send their apologies.
miserly . . . not even enough for a pound of sausages and a couple of loaves, while workers on average pay are receiving increases of more than £20 a week and some executives increases of more than £2,000 a week.
we cannot get a decent link for pensioners . . .--[ Official Report , 21 October 1991; Vol. 196, c. 645-651.]
when a man knows he is to be hanged in a fortnight, it concentrates his mind wonderfully.
We published our written submissions (Pensions, not Poor Relief) in March 1998. They amounted to a comprehensive and sustainable programme of reform, taking account of the needs of both today's and tomorrow's pensioners. We stressed the need to make good the loss of the value of the basic pension resulting from the breaking of the link with average earnings, and to restore the link for the future.
We must resurrect the basic pension as the foundation of security in old age for everyone. This means the restoration of the earnings link for future annual upratings.
Question put, That the clause be read a Second time:--
The House divided: Ayes 39, Noes 275.
Votes by party, red entries are votes against the majority for that party.
What is Tell? '+1 tell' means that in addition one member of that party was a teller for that division lobby.
What are Boths? An MP can vote both aye and no in the same division. The boths page explains this.
What is Turnout? This is measured against the total membership of the party at the time of the vote.
|Party||Majority (No)||Minority (Aye)||Both||Turnout|
|Lab||274 (+2 tell)||8||0||68.3%|
|LDem||0||29 (+2 tell)||0||67.4%|
|Diane Abbott||Hackney North and Stoke Newington||Lab (minister)||aye|
|Mr Tony Benn||Chesterfield||Lab||aye|
|Jeremy Corbyn||Islington North||Lab||aye|
|Lynne Jones||Birmingham, Selly Oak||Lab||aye|
|John Martin McDonnell||Hayes and Harlington||Lab (minister)||aye|
|Alan Simpson||Nottingham South||Lab||aye|
|Mike Wood||Batley and Spen||Lab||aye|