Clause 2 - Minimum Retirement Income
Retirement Income Reform Bill
3:45 pm
Mr Edward Garnier (Harborough, Conservative)
I want to introduce the amendment briefly, not because of what you just said, Mr. Atkinson, but in any event. I want also to soothe the Minister yet further by saying that I do not wholly object to his amendment No. 42. I want the Chancellor to work out what is best from the point of view of both the public purse and the public, in so far as those two concepts diverge, when it comes to setting the minimum retirement income.
I am not in a position as an Opposition Member on the Back Benches to work out what would be an appropriate level for the minimum income in years to come—that would be true were I on the Front
Bench, too. Only the Chancellor, as the custodian of the economy, can properly do that, but he will take advice from within the Treasury, and no doubt from outside it, about where best to pitch the figure for each year. I trust that one way or the other the Committee can come to a resolution on both amendments; that is, that the Chancellor, following consultation, should make the order, or that there should be deletion and replacement with the words that the Government propose in their amendment No. 42.
Frankly, I am not going to go to the cross for either amendment; all I ask is for the Minister to accept the good faith in which I propose the amendment, as I want to hand not only to the current Chancellor but to successive Chancellors the power and the discretion to set the minimum income.