Reduction of Payments in Respect of Certain Supplementation Schemes

Clause 47 – in the House of Commons at 10:45 pm on 25th March 1980.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Mr Albert Booth Mr Albert Booth , Barrow-in-Furness 10:45 pm, 25th March 1980

I beg to move amendment No. 82, in page 43, line 35 leave out 'exceed its liabilities' and insert— 'exceeded its liabilities on 31st December 1979'.

Mr. Deputy Speaker:

With this it will be convenient to discuss the following amendments: No. 83, in page 43, line 44, at end insert— '(2A) If the actuary to the basic scheme certifies that following a reduction as specified in subsection (2) of this section in payments to the persons administrating the supplementation scheme the basic scheme has liabilities exceeding its assets at any time later than one year after the reduction was made, the payments to the persons administering the supplementation scheme made under section 43(1) shall he increased for each financial year after the date of the actuary's certificate by the aggregrate amount for that year of such of the increases mentioned in subsection (1) as become payable from that date or, if less, the relevant proportion of those increases.'. No. 84, in page 44, line 2, leave out from first 'by' to end of line 3 and insert '85 per cent. of the amount by which the assets of that scheme exceed its liabilities'. Amendment (a) to amendment No. 84, leave out '85 per cent.' and insert '70 per cent.'.

No. 85, in page 44, line 7, leave out 'exceed its liabilities' and insert 'exceeded its liabilities on 31st December 1979'. No. 86, in page 44, leave out lines 11 to 13.

Photo of Mr Albert Booth Mr Albert Booth , Barrow-in-Furness

The amendments all relate to a group of railway pension schemes. A serious problem is posed. Where a reduction has been made in payments to a supplementation scheme and consequently the basic scheme runs into deficit, amendments Nos. 82 and 83 require that the payments to the supplementation scheme must be increased. That probably is a somewhat abstruse proposition to those who did not serve in Committee. Therefore, I shall offer some explanation.

It has been the practice for a number of years for pension increases granted by the British Railways Board under schemes of supplementation to be reduced by the amount of any increase that pensioners have had from their basic schemes after retirement. The basic schemes are those that pay fixed pensions. Supplementation schemes have been set up with the sole objective of adding to the payments made under the basic scheme to maintain their purchasing power.

The justification for reducing the supplementation scheme payments is the increase in the basic scheme. The payment under the supplementation and the payment under the basic scheme, added together, maintain what was the original purchasing power of the basic scheme.

In practice, the offsetting of the increase in the supplementary pension payments against increases in the basic pensions has been less than complete. That is partly because the offsetting does not occur until the supplementation scheme is reviewed, and partly because there is no offsetting in the case of people who have not yet retired. It does not apply to active members of a scheme.

The net effect of these factors is that in the various distributions of surplus that have occurred in railway pension schemes over the past few years the proportion of the surplus that has been offset averaged 60 per cent., or perhaps a little less.

I shall give an example that may help to make the position clearer. On 1 January 1976 the Great Western Railway Salaried Staff Widows and Orphans Pension Society increased its benefits. The cost was met out of a surplus revealed at an actuarial valuation. A comparatively small part of the increase related to serving employees, and was not offset. The majority of the improvement related to pensioners, and consisted of an increase of 29 per cent. in the pensions payable from the society.

The board did not seek to reduce the existing supplement that had been granted because of cost of living increases. Instead, the offsetting was achieved by not granting any supplement in December 1976 and by granting only a much reduced supplement on 1 December 1977. There was a delay of about 18 months before the whole of the pension increase was fully offset against supplementation. That was a significant factor. The net effect was that only 59 per cent. of the total surplus revealed for active members and pensioners was clawed back on that occasion.

There was no uniformity of practice between the clawback in the various schemes, and I have information on that matter. In the case of the North Eastern Railway Servants' Pension Society, the clawback averaged about 49 per cent.; in the London and North Western Railway Provident Society for providing Pensions for Widows and Orphans of Members of the Salaried Staff, 78 per cent.; in the Great Western Railway Salaried Staff Widows and Orphans' Pension Society, 44 per cent.; in the Great Western Railway Enginemen and Firemen's Mutual Assurance, Sick and Superannuation Society—I am throwing that in to prove that I am not being too selective—there was no clawback. In the LMSR (North Staffordshire Section) Friendly Society there was no clawback; in the Thomas Bantock and Co. Benevolent and Pension Fund the clawback was 61 per cent.; and in the Great Western Railway Widows and Orphans' Benevolent Fund, it was 75 per cent. In practice, there has been a range of clawback of the additional amounts paid out under the supplementation schemes following an increase in the basic scheme.

Having regard to that history, it is fair to say that if the Bill is not to worsen the position of the pensioners in the older schemes, not more than about 60 per cent. of the surplus should be clawed back by the Government.

The way in which the Government propose to claw back the surplus is to reduce the payments that they make to those administering the pensions in the basic schemes. Has the Minister ensured that there is a mechanism that allows such a cutback in payments to be covered by the other scheme? I presume that there is, but I would like it confirmed and on the record. If there is not, it would be difficult for those administering the funds to take money from another fund to make up for the reduced Government payment.

11.30 pm

That is not the principal issue that we are raising in the amendment. We are raising two principal issues. One is the amount of the clawback and the number of occasions on which it may occur. We propose in amendment (a) to amendment No. 48 to reduce the amount that the Government can claw back from the surplus in the supplementation scheme from 85 per cent. to 70 per cent. That is splitting the difference to some extent. We think that this is a reasonable request to make to the Government against the historic position where only about 60 per cent. has been clawed back.

Coupled with that there is a provision in amendments Nos. 85 and 86 that the clawback should take place only once. As the Bill is drafted, the Government can decide to claw back on any occasion when the Government Actuary certifies for them that these funds have assets in excess of their liabilities.

These are matters of argument. A matter about which there can be no argument is that there will he a considerable problem for people who have to administer these supplementation funds if on some future occasion the actuary certifies that the fund has assets in excess of its liabilities and the Government then claw back and at a future date the basic scheme runs into deficit and, because of what the Government have clawed back in the past from the supplementation fund, that fund is unable to sustain the purchasing power of the pension.

Amendments Nos. 82 and 83 provide that in those specific cases where the clawback has taken place and subsequently the combined operation has run into deficit—that is, where the supplementation fund out of which the Government have taken the money by clawback is then unable to carry out the purpose for which it was set up—the Government should reinstate—in other words, the Government should then adjust the deduction in payments which they have made to the basic fund. That is the least that the Government can do.

Surely it cannot be the intention of a Government whose Minister of Transport has said that whatever else the Bill will do it will not worsen the position of the pensioners, to use their majority in the House to claw back up to 80 per cent.—the point applies even though it is only 60 per cent. or 70 per cent. of the surplus in a fund set up specifically for supplementation of basic pension schemes—and to leave schemes in a position where they will not be able to fulfil the purpose for which they were set up—that is, to supplement basic schemes to maintain their purchasing power.

I do not know how much money is involved. I have been amazed by some of the sums we have had to talk about in Committee on the wider historic pension rights. Some of these are relatively small schemes. The principle is crucial. In Committee the Minister rejected a proposition that I thought was highly equitable—that if he was to have the right to claw back from those that were in surplus he should make some contribution to those that were in deficit. The Minister would have nothing to do with that. However, tonight the Minister has the opportunity to show that it is not his intention to use this clawback provision in such a way as to destroy the basic purpose for which some of these supplementation schemes were set up.

If the Minister uses his power here and, as a result—although I admit that at the time he makes the claw-back from a supplementation scheme he may not be able to foresee that two or three years later the basic scheme that it exists to supplement will run into deficit; we cannot necessarily foresee what will happen to basic schemes any more than we can foresee what happens to wider funded schemes—a scheme inadvertently runs into deficit, it is of crucial importance that he should then put the payments back to the position that they were in at the time the Bill was passed and pay to the basic schemes the proportion that he should fund under the provisions of the Bill but for this very peculiar provision wthin the clause which allows him to claw back part of surpluses by reducing his liability to make payments to basic schemes.

Photo of Mr Robert McCrindle Mr Robert McCrindle , Brentwood and Ongar

I have been keeping a watching brief on this part of the Bill that relates to pension matters on behalf of the British Transport Police pensioners, to whose federation I offer some parliamentary advice. My impression is that few of the members of the British Transport Police appear to be other than convinced that as a result of the provisions they will be no worse off in terms of the pensions that they are likely to receive. They have, however, expressed concern on some points. I beg the indulgence of the House to mention them.

Under the best pension schemes in the private sector, not only is there some form of protection for rising prices after the person has retired, albeit less generous than is normally the case in public service pension schemes; there is also a tendency in the best private schemes to improve benefits, sometimes benefits outwith retirement benefits, as the scheme progresses. It is possible to achieve improvements only by allocating surpluses as they are thrown up. The point made by some British Transport policemen is that with the sizeable proportion of any foreseeable surplus being taken away under the provisions proposed by the Government the possibility of improving the provisions of the scheme becomes remote.

The second point that the British Transport Police pensioners wish me to draw to the attention of the House is the magnitude of the surplus offset at the level of 85 per cent., which, it is contended, almost eliminates the chance of making some of the improvements to which I have already referred. We are discussing in this collection of amendments not only the Government amendment that specifies 85 per cent. but amendment (a) to that amendment, which refers to 70 per cent.

I have no wish to put before the House any particular percentage, although it is instructive that even the percentage proposed by the Opposition may be seen as comparatively high in some quarters. I am not pressing on my hon. Friends that they should opt for this or that percentage. I am suggesting, even at this advanced stage of discussion of the Bill, that there might be some advantage if they were to retain a degree of flexibility so that they do not feel that they should specify any particular percentage but could lay down a maximum that the percentage would be allowed to reach, thereby leaving them with flexibility of operation.

My last point relates to a problem particular to the British Transport Police. I should like to quote one short paragraph from a letter directed to my right hon. Friend the Minister of Transport by the chairman of the British Transport Police Superannuation Fund, in which he says: As you probably know, the Police Fund is divided into two sections. The 1968 section which now mainly comprises pensioners and which is closed to new entrants, and the 1970 section which is open to new entrants. The former does not provide any pensions increases, whilst the latter makes provision within the rules for the same increases to be paid as are granted to retired civil servants. Although there are these two sections, the Fund is treated as one entity for valuation and investment purposes. It seems to me, and to my colleagues on the Management Committee to be totally wrong for such a large slice of future surpluses to be used in the manner which you propose". The point that I wish to make can be summarised in two brief sentences. Can the Minister guarantee that if there is a surplus in the British Transport Police Superannuation Fund 1970 section it will not be used to pay increases to pensions payable from the British Transport Police Superannuation Fund 1968 section? If he cannot, many will feel that this is discrimination against the officers who joined the 1970 section and accepted higher contributions in order to safeguard increases to their pensions after retirement.

To have any of this money used to pay increases to pensioners under the 1968 section would be a misuse of members' contributions paid to the 1970 section.

I conclude by reminding the House that under the Wright report last year the British Transport Police were placed on all fours with the civil police in relation to pay, conditions and experience. One area in which they do not receive comparable treatment is pensions. It is contended that unless the Minister can meet the perfectly valid points that I have made tonight the gap on pensions will be widened between the civil police and the British Transport Police. I am sure that Ministers would not wish that to happen.

Photo of Kenneth Clarke Kenneth Clarke Parliamentary Secretary (Ministry of Transport)

I begin by agreeing with my hon. Friend the Member for Brentwood and Ongar (Mr. McCrindle) that normally the position in a pension scheme which builds up a surplus is that that surplus is used to inflation-proof as far as possible the benefits in payment. Also part of the surplus is used to improve the benefits of the scheme for those still in service.

In this case we are dealing with a set of exceptional circumstances that have arisen in the transport area where in a number of basic pension schemes that paid non-inflation-proof pensions it became the custom to pay inflation-proof pensions, and special supplementation schemes were set up to pay those inflation-proof additions to benefit. The Government then took over the obligation to pay the supplementation schemes and the inflation proofing of the benefits in payment.

As inflation has gone up, the cost to the Government of giving that inflation proofing has gone up considerably. At the same time, that same inflation has enabled the basic schemes to start building up surpluses over and above their non-inflation-proofed pension entitlements. Given that the Government are paying a large part of the bill to inflation-proof benefits under these schemes, the Government should also have a good share of what inflation has brought to the basic schemes, and most of what the basic schemes earn by way of surplus should be devoted to defray the Government's expenditure in meeting the cost of supplementation.

What is the proper division between the Government and the pension schemes? The main problem arises when one considers the position of those who are in service contributing to basic schemes and not receiving pensions. Those who have retired and are receiving pensions are getting all the benefit of the inflation proofing, and any surpluses under the scheme should go to the Government who are paying for the inflation proofing.

Those still in service are paying contributions from which they are getting no benefit if every time a surplus arises nothing is done to improve their potential final benefit. We have tried to produce a fair division that would meet the position of the funds and the members still in service on the one hand, and the Government and the taxpayer on the other.

11.45 pm

All kinds of possibilities have been canvassed, but in the end those who manage these schemes preferred some fixed rule applied to all the schemes rather than a complicated formula. For that reason, in amendment No. 84 we have gone back to suggesting that 85 per cent. of any surplus in a basic scheme should be used to defray the Government's expenses for supplementing benefits under that scheme.

Having said that, I can give one piece of good news. All the concern in the Committee turned on the LNER new section, which has surpluses of £30 million, and it was thought that the large number of members of that scheme who were in service would be deprived if 85 per cent. of that surplus went to the Treasury. However, we discovered that so great was the surplus under that scheme that it could cover the cost of supplementation many times over, so in practice the percentage taken by the Government from that—the biggest scheme of all—will be far below 85 per cent. and will not in any way damage the serving members. The benefits to the taxpayer arising out of amendment No. 84 are comparatively modest and, for the reasons that I have given, entirely fair.

Dealing with the other points raised by the right hon. Member for Barrow-in-Furness (Mr. Booth), I cannot meet his point about what happens when a basic scheme goes back into deficit. Summarised, the argument is that if we were to accept this amendment, or anything along the lines proposed, it would be possible, as soon as a basic scheme got into surplus, for the fund managers hastily to rearrange matters, to start giving out improvements in benefits to their members, and to make sure that they were in deficit again fairly smartly to prevent the Treasury from taking its 85 per cent. We would have to take powers to control the scheme to prevent that temptation arising, and we would rather not do that.

The right hon. Gentleman's point about pensioners who get their pensions from two funds gives rise to some complications. Clause 47 needs tidying up, and we shall table some amendments in another place to meet that point.

I thought that we had covered every conceivable possibility of basic schemes am supplementation schemes in our debates on the clause. However, my hon. Friend the Member for Brentwood and Ongar has produced a new variety of railway pension fund—the British Transport Police Superannuation Fund, which turns out to have part of its fund paying out index-linked pensions and the other part not doing so but relying on supplementation by the Government. I should have relied on my hon. Friend to produce a new animal to make our problems worse, because I remember his expertise in this area when he and I were involved with the social security legislation in 1975.

My hon. Friend is quite right. Clause 47 as it stands would not meet the problem and would give rise to the sense of grievance that was expressed in the letter that he read to the House. For that reason I give him an undertaking that we will table appropriate amendments in another place. We shall have to devise arrangements whereby any such surplus can be divided into two parts, one part of which is subject to the 85 per cent. that has to go to the taxpayer when it produces a surplus and the other part of which can devote its surplus to improving benefits because there will be no claim upon it by the taxpayer. I see that my hon. Friend agrees that that meets his point. On that basis I ask the House, to accept amendment No. 84 but to resist the other amendments that the right hon. Member for Barrow-in-Furness has canvassed.

Photo of Mr Albert Booth Mr Albert Booth , Barrow-in-Furness

With the leave of the House, Mr. Deputy Speaker, may I say that the Parliamentary Secretary has not addressed himself to the Point of amendments Nos. 85 and 86? I will remind him. The Bill as presently drafted would allow the Government to extend the clawing back to future services and not just to the surplus at the time when the Bill is enacted. I remind him and the Minister of the assurance that they gave us time and again in Committee. They assured us that they would not worsen the position beyond the point that was guaran-

teed by the 1974 Act.

We have had many arguments about other improvements subsequent to that Act, but never before tonight have we had the Government doing something that could worsen the position. Under the 1974 Act, although an allowance may have been made in calculating the fund in debt for any surpluses existing at the end of 1979—that was clearly allowed under the 1979 Act—no account could have been taken for clawback purposes of any surpluses made after 1979. If the Bill is left in this form it will worsen the position guaranteed by the 1974 Act.

I ask the Parliamentary Secretary to accept amendments Nos. 85 and 86. If he does not, I shall invite my hon. Friends to vote in favour of them, just as we would vote for the reduction of the claw-back percentage.

Photo of Kenneth Clarke Kenneth Clarke Parliamentary Secretary (Ministry of Transport)

I am sorry that I overlooked that point. The answer is "No." I do not accept that what we are doing will worsen the position compared with the 1974 Act. I shall not go once again into the technical differences between the settlement under the 1974 Act and that embodied in this Bill. We seek to achieve the same end by a different method.

The argument of the right hon. Member for Barrow-in-Furness (Mr. Booth) overlooks what the board has been doing under the settlement in the 1974 Act to ensure that any surpluses arising on basic schemes are diverted to British Railways 1974 fund. That is the basic supplementation fund. I notice that the right hon. Gentleman nods his head. Perhaps he will not press these amendments to a Division. If we had carried on without the Bill the board would have taken steps to ensure that surpluses under the basic schemes were devoted to improving the supplementation scheme. We are changing the mechanics. We are using the method set out in the Bill to achieve precisely the same result.

Question put, That the amendment be made:—

The House divided: Ayes 211, Noes 276.

Division NO.245]AYES[11.51 pm
Abse, leoAnderson, DonaldAshley, Rt Hon Jack
Adams, AllenArcher, Rt Hon peterAtkinson, Norman(H'get, Tott'ham
Allaun, FrankArmstrong, Rt Hon ErnestBarnett, Guy (Greenwich)
Barnett, Rt Hon Joel (Heywood)Harrison, Rt Hon WalterPavitt, Laurie
Benn, Rt Hon Anthony WedgwoodHaynes, FrankPendry, Tom
Bidwell, SydneyHeffer, Eric S.Penhallgon, David
Booth, Rt Hon AlbertHogg, Norman (E Dunbartonshire)Powell, Raymond (Ogmore)
Boothroyd, Miss BettyHolland, Stuart (L'beth, Vauxhall)Prescott, John
Bradley, TomHome Robertson, JohnRace, Reg
Bray, Dr JeremyHomewood, WilliamRadice, Giles
Erown, Hugh D. (Provan)Hooley, FrankRees, Rt Hon Meriyn (Leeds South)
Brown, Ronald W. (Hackney S)Horam, JohnRichardson, Jo
Brown, Ron (Edinburgh, Leith)Huckfield, LeaRoberts, Albert (Normanton)
Buchan, NormanHudson Davies, Gwilym EdnyfedRoberts, Ernest (Hackney North)
Callaghan, Jim (Middleton & P)Hughes, Mark (Durham)Roberts, Gwilym (Cannock)
Campbell, IanHughes, Robert (Aberdeen North)Robertson, George
Campbell-Savours, DaleHughes, Roy (Newport)Robinson, Geoffrey (Coventry NW)
Carmlchael, NeilJanner, Hon GrevilleRodgers, Rt Hon William
Cartwright, JohnJohn, BrynmorRooker, J. W.
Clark, Dr David (South Shields)Johnson, James (Hull West)Rowlands,Ted
Cocks, Rt Hon Michael (Bristol S)Johnson, Walter (Derby South)Ryman, John
Cohen, StanleyJones, Rt Hon Alec (Rhondda)Sandelson, Neville
Coleman, DonaldJones, Dan (Burnley)Sever, John
Concannon, Rt Hon J. D.Kaufman, Rt Hon GeraldSheerman, Barry
Conlan, BernardKerr, RussellSheldon, Rt Hon Robert (A'ton-u-L)
Cowans, HarryKilroy-Silk, RobertShore, Rt Hon Peter (Step and Pop)
Crowther, J. S.Lamble, DavidSilkin, Rt Hon John (Deptford)
Cryer, BobLamborn, HarrySilkin, Rt Hon S. C. (Dulwich)
Cunliffe, LawrenceLeadbitter, TedSilverman, Julius
Cunningham, George (Islington S)Leighton, RonaldSnape, Peter
Cunningham, Dr John (Whitehaven)Lestor, Miss Joan (Eton & Slough)Soley, Clive
Dalyell, TamLewis, Ron (Carlisle)Spearing, Nigel)
Davidson, ArthurLitherland, RobertSpriggs, Leslie
Davies, lfor (Gower)Lofthouse, GeoffreyStallard, A. W.
Davis, Clinton (Hackney Central)Lyon, Alexander (York)Stoddart, David
Davis, Terry (B'rm'ham, Stechford)Lyons, Edward (Bradford West)Stott, Roger
Deakins, EricMcCartney, HughStrang, Gavin
Dempsey, JameMcDonald, Dr OonaghStraw, Jack
Dewar, DonaldMcGuIre, Michael (Ince)Summerskill, Hon Dr Shirley
Dixon, DonaldMcKay, Alien (Penistone)Taylor, Mrs Ann (Bolton West)
Dobson, FrankMcKeivey, WilliamThomas, Jeffrey (Abertillery)
Douglas, DickMacKenzie, Rt Hon GregorThomas, Mike (Newcastle East)
Douglas-Mann, BruceMaclennan, RobertThomas, Dr Roger (Carmarthen)
Dubs, AlfredMcMillan, Tom (Glasgow, Central)Thorne, Stan (Preston South)
Dunnett, JackMcNally, ThomasTilley, John
Dunwoody, Mrs GwynethMagee, BryanTinn, James
Eadie, AlexMarks, KennethTorney, Tom
Eastham, KenMarshall, David (Gl'sgow.Sbettles'n)Urwin, Rt Hon Tom
Ellis, Raymond (NE Derbyshire)Marshall, Dr Edmund (Goole)Varley, Rt Hon Eric G.
Ellis, Tom (Wrexham)Marshall, Jim (Leicester South)Walker, Rt Hon Harold (Doncaster)
Evans, loan (Aberdare)Martin, Michael (Gl'gow, Springb'rn)Watkins, David
Evans, John (Newton)Maxton, JohnWeetch, Ken
Ewing, HarryMaynard, Miss JoanWellbeloved, James
Field, FrankMeacher, MichaelWelsh, Michael
Flannery, MartinMeliish, Rt Hon RobertWhite, Frank R. (Bury & Radcliffe)
Fletcher, Ted (Darlington)Mlkardo, IanWhite, James (Glasgow, Pollok)
Foot, Rt Hon MichaelMillan, Rt Hon BruceWhitehead, Phillip
Ford, BenMiller, Dr M. S. (East Kilbride)Whitlock, William
Forrester, JohnMitchell, Austin (Grimsby)Willey, Rt Hon Frederick
Foster, DerekMitchell, R. C. (Soton, Itchen)Williams, Rt Hon Alan (Swansea W)
Foulkes, GeorgeMorris, Rt Hon Alfred (Wythenshawe)Williams, Sir Thomas (Warrington)
Fraser, John (Lambeth, Norwood)Morris, RI Hon Charles (Openshaw)Wilson, Rt Hon Sir Harold (Huyton)
Garrett, John (Norwich S)Morris, Rt Hon John (Aberavon)Wilson, William (Coventry SE)
Garrett, W. E. (Wallsend)Morton, GeorgeWlnnick, David
George, BruceMoyle, Rt Hon RolandWoolmer, Kenneth
Gilbert, Rt Hon Dr JohnNewens, StanleyWright, Sheila
Ginsburg, DavidOakes, Rt Hon GordonYoung, David (Bolton East)
Golding, JohnO'Neill, Martin
Graham, TedOrme, Rt Hon StanleyTELLERS FOR THE AYES:
Grant, George (Morpeth)Owen, Rt Hon Dr DavidMr. Joseph Dean and
Grant, John (Islington C)Palmer, ArthurMr. James Hamilton.
Hamilton, W. W. (Central Fife)Park, George
NOES
Aitken, JonathanBenyon, W. (Buckingham)Bright, Graham
Alexander, RichardBerry, Hon AnthonyBrinton, Tim
Ancram, MichaelBest, KeithBrittan, Leon
Arnold, TomBiffen, Rt Hon JohnBrocklebank-Fowler, Christopher
Aspinwall, JackBiggs-Davison, JohnBrown, Michael (Brigg & Sc'thorpe)
Atkins, Robert (Preston North)Blackburn, JohnBrowne, John (Winchester)
Atkinson, David (B'mouth, East)Blaker, PeterBruce-Gardyne, John
Baker, Kenneth (St. Marylebone)Body, RichardBuck, Antony
Baker, Nicholas (North Dorset)Bonsor Sir NicholasBudgen, Nick
Beaumont-Dark, AnthonyBoscawen, Hon RobertBulmer, Esmond
Bell, Sir RonaldBottomley, Peter (Woolwich West)Burden, F. A.
Bendall, VivianBowden, AndrewButcher, John
Benyon, Thomas (Abingdon)Boyson, Dr RhodesButler, Hon Adam
Cadbury, JocelynIrving, Charles (Cheltenham)Proctor, K. Harvey
Carlisle, John (Luton West)Johnson Smith, GeoffreyRaison, Timothy
Carlisle, Kenneth (Lincoln)Jopling, Rt Hon MichaelRathbone, Tim
Carlisle, Rt Hon Mark (Runcorn)Kaberry, Sir DonaldRees, Peter (Dover and Deal)
Chalker, Mrs LyndaKershaw, AnthonyRees-Davies, W. R.
Channon, PaulKimball, MarcusRenton, Tim
Chapman, SydneyKing, Rt Hon TomRhodes, James, Robert
Churchill, W. S.Kitson, Sir TimothyRhys Williams, Sir Brandon
Clark, Hon Alan (Plymouth, Sutton)Knight, Mrs JillRidley, Hon Nicholas
Clark, Sir William (Croydon South)Knox, DavidRidsdale, Jullian
Clarke, Kenneth (Rushcliffe)Lamont, NormanRifkind, Malcolm
Clegg, Sir WalterLang, IanRoberts, Michael (Cardiff NW)
Colvin, MichaelLangford-Holt, Sir JohnRoberts, Wyn (Conway)
Cope,JohnLatham, MichaelRoss, Wm. (Londonderry)
Corrie, JohnLawrence, IvanRossi, Hugh
Costain, A.P.Lawson, NigelRost, Peter
Critchley, JulianLee, JohnSainsbury, Hon Timothy
Crouch, DavidLe Marchant, SpencerSt. John-Stevas, Rt Hon Norman
Dickens, GeoffreyLennox-Boyd, Hon MarkScott, Nicholas
Dorrell, StephenLester, Jim (Beeston)Shaw, Michael (Scarborough)
Dover, DenshoreLewis, Kenneth (Rutland)Shelton, William (Streatham)
du Cann, Rt Hon EdwardLloyd, Ian (Havant & Waterloo)Shepherd, Colin (Hereford)
Dunn, Robert (Dartford)Lloyd, Peter (Fareham)Shepherd, Richard(Aldridge-Br'hills)
Dykes, HughLoveridge, JohnShersby, Michael
Eden, Rt Hon Sir JohnLuce, RichardSilvester, Fred
Edwards, Rt Hon N. (Pembroke)Lyell, NicholasSkeet, T. H. H.
Eggar, TimothyMcCrindle, RobertSpeller, Tony
Elliott, Sir WilliamMacfarlane, NeilSpence, John
Emery, PeterMacGregor, JohnSpicer, Michael (S Worcestershire)
Fairbairn, NicholasMacKay, John (Argyll)Sproat, Iain
Fairgrieve, RussellMcNair-Wilson, Michael (Newbury)Squire, Robin
Faith, Mrs SheilaMcNair-Wilson, Patrick (New Forest)Stainton, Keith
Farr, JohnMcQuarrie, AlbertStanbrook, Ivor
Fell, AnthonyMadel, DavidStanley, John
Fenner, Mrs PeggyMajor, JohnSteen, Anthony
Finsberg, Geoffrey Marlow, TonyStevens, Martin
Fisher, Sir NigelMarshall, Michael (Arundel)Stewart, Ian (Hitchin)
Fletcher, Alexander (Edinburgh N)Mather, CarolStewart, John (East Renfrewshire)
Fookes, Miss JanetMaude, Rt Hon AngusStokes, John
Forman, NigelMawby, RayStradling Thomas, J.
Fowler, Rt Hon NormanMawhinney, Dr BrianTapsell, Peter
Fox, MarcusMaxwell-Hyslop, RobinTaylor, Teddy (Southend East)
Fraser, Peter (South Angus)Mayhew, PatrickTebbit, Norman
Fry, PeterMeyer, Sir AnthonyTemple-Morris, Peter
Gardiner, George (Reigate)Miller, Hal (Bromsgrove & Redditch)Thatcher, Rt Hon Mrs Margaret
Gardner, Edward (South Fylde)Mills, Iain (Meriden)Thomas, Rt Hon Peter (Hendon S)
Garel-Jones, TristanMills, Peter (West Devon)Thompson, Donald
Goodhart, PhilipMiscampbell, NormanThorne, Nell (Ilford South)
Goodhew, VictorMitchell, David (Basingstoke)Thornton, Malcolm
Gorst. JohnMoate, RogerTownend, John (Bridlington)
Gow, IanMolyneaux, JamesTownsend, Cyril D. (Bexleyheath)
Gower, Sir RaymondMonro, HectorTrippler, David
Gray, HamishMontgomery, FergusTrotter, Neville
Greenway, HarryMorris, Michael (Northampton, Sth)van Straubenzee, W. R.
Grieve, PercyMorrison, Hon Charles (Devizes)Vaughan, Dr Gerard
Griffiths, Eldon (Bury St Edmunds)Morrison, Hon Peter (City of Chester)Viggers, Peter
Griffiths, Peter (Portsmouth N)Mudd, DavidWaddington, David
Grist, IanMurphy, ChristopherWakeham, John
Grylls, MichaelMyles, DavidWaldegrave, Hon William
Gummer, John SelwynNeale, GerrardWalker, Bill (Perth & E Perthshire)
Hamilton, Hon Archie (Eps'm&Ew'll)Needham, RichardWaller, Garry
Hamilton, Michael (Salisbury)Nelson, AnthonyWalters, Dennis
Hannam, JohnNeubert, MichaelWard, John
Haselhurst, AlanNewton, TonyWatson, John
Hastings, StephenOppenheim, Rt Hon Mrs SallyWells, John (Maidstone)
Havers, Rt Hon Sir MichaelPage, John (Harrow, West)Wells, Bowen (Hert'rd & Stev'nage)
Hawksley, WarrenPage, Rt Hon Sir R. GrahamWheeler, John
Hayhoe, BarneyPage, Richard (SW Hertfordshire)Whitney, Raymond
Heddle, JohnParkinson, CecilWickenden, Keith
Henderson, BarryParris, MatthewWiggin, Jerry
Heseltine, Rt Hon MichaelPatten, Christopher (Bath)Wilkinson, John
Hicks, RobertPatten, John (Oxford)Williams, Delwyn (Montgomery)
Higgins, Rt Hon Terence L.Pattie, GeoffreyWinterton, Nicholas
Hogg, Hon Douglas (Grantham)Pawsey, JamesWolfson, Mark
Hooson, TomPercival, Sir IanYoung, Sir George (Acton)
Hordern, PeterPollock, AlexanderYounger, Rt Hon George
Howell, Rt Hon David (Guildford)Porter, George
Howell, Ralph (North Norfolk)Powell, Rt Hon J. Enoch (S Down)TELLERS FOR THE NOES:
Hunt, David (Wirral)Price, David (Eastleigh)Lord James Douglas-Hamilton and
Hunt, John (Ravensbourne)Prior, Rt Hon JamesMr. Peter Brooke

Question accordingly negatived

Amendment proposed: No. 84, in page 44, line 2 leave out from first "by" to end of line 3 and insert 85 per cent. of the amount by which the assets of that scheme exceed its liabilities" [Mr. Kenneth Clarke.]

Amendment proposed to the proposed amendment: (a), leave out "85 per

cent. "and insert "70 per cent.". [Mr. Booth.]

Question put, That the amendment to the proposed amendment be made:

The House divided: Ayes 207, Noes 275.

Division No. 246]AYES[12.03 am
Abse, LeoGilbert, Rt Hon Dr JohnOakes, Rt Hon Gordon
Adams, AllenGolding, JohnO'Neill, Martin
Allaun, FrankGraham, TedOrme, Rt Hon Stanley
Anderson, DonaldGrant, George (Morpeth)Owen, Rt Hon Dr David
Archer, Rt Hon PeterGrant, John (Islington C)Palmer, Arthur
Armstrong, Rt Hon ErnestHamilton, James (Bothwell)Park, George
Ashley, Rt Hon Jack]Hamilton, W. W. (Central Fife)Pavitt, Laurie
Atkinson, Norman (H'gey, Tott'ham)Harrison, Rt Hon WalterPendry, Tom
Barnett, Guy (Greenwich)Haynes, FrankPowell, Raymond (Ogmore)
Barnett, Rt Hon Joel (Heywood)Heffer, Eric S.Prescott, John
Benn, Rt Hon Anthony WedgwoodHogg, Norman (E Dunbartonshire)Race, Reg
Bidwell, SydneyHolland, Stuart (L'beth, Vauxhall)Radice, Giles
Booth, Rt Hon AlbertHome Robertson, JohnRees, Rt Hon Merlyn (Leeds South)
Boothroyd, Miss BettyHomewood, WilliamRichardson, Jo
Bradley, TomHooley, FrankRoberts, Ernest (Hackney North)
Bray, Dr JeremyHoram, JohnRoberts, Gwilym (Cannock)
Brown, Hugh D. (Provan)Huckfield, LesRobertson, George
Brown, Ronald W. (Hackney S)Hudson Davies, Gwilym EdnyfedRobinson, Geoffrey (Coventry KW)
Brown, Ron (Edinburgh, Leith)Hughes, Mark (Durham)Rodgers, Rt Hon William
Buchan, NormanHughes, Robert (Aberdeen North)Rooker, J. W.
Callaghan, Jim (Middleton & P)Hughes, Roy (Newport)Rowlands, Ted
Campbell, IanJanner, Hon GrevilleSandelson, Neville
Campbell-Savours, DaleJohn, BrynmorSever, John
Carmichael, NellJohnson, James (Hull West)Sheerman, Barry
Cartwright, JohnJohnson, Walter (Derby South)Sheldon, Rt Hon Robert (A'ton-u-L)
Clark, Dr David (South Shields)Jones, Rt Hon Alec (Rhondda)Shore, Rt Hon Peter (Step and Pop)
Cocks, Rt Hon Michael (Bristol S)Jones, Dan (Burnley)Silkin, Rt Hon John (Deptford)
Cohen, StanleyKaufman, Rt Hon GeraldSilkin, Rt Hon S. C. (Dulwich)
Coleman, DonaldKerr, RussellSilverman, Julius
Concannon, Rt Hon J. D.Kilroy-Silk, RobertSnape, Peter
Conlan, BernardLambie, DavidSoley, Clive
Cowans, HarryLamborn, HarrySpearing, Nigel
Crowther, J. S.Leadbitter, TedSpriggs, Leslie
Cryer, BobLeighton, RonaldStallard, A. W.
Cunliffe, LawrenceLestor, Miss Joan (Eton & Slough)Stoddart, David
Cunningham, George (Islington S)Lewis, Ron (Carlisle)Stott, Roger
Cunningham, Dr John (Whitehaven)Litherland, RobertStrang, Gavin
Dalyell, TamLofthouse, GeoffreyStraw, Jack
Davidson, ArthurLyon, Alexander (York)Summerskill, Hon Dr Shirley
Davies, Ifor (Gower)Lyons, Edward (Bradford West)Taylor, Mrs Ann (Bolton West)
Davis, Clinton (Hackney Central)McCartney, HughThomas, Jeffrey (Abertillery)
Davis, Terry (B'rm'ham, Stechford)McDonald, Dr OonaghThomas, Mike (Newcastle East)
Deakins, EricMcGuire, Michael (Ince)Thomas, Dr Roger (Carmarthen)
Dempsey, JamesMcKay, Allen (Penistone)Thorne, Stan (Preston South)
Dewar, DonaldMcKelvey, WilliamTilley, John
Dixon, DonaldMacKenzie, Rt Hon GregorTorney, Tom
Dobson. FrankMaclennan, RobertUrwin, Rt Hon Tom
Douglas, DickMcMillan, Tom (Glasgow, Central)Varley, Rt Hon Eric G.
Douglas-Mann, BruceMcNally, ThomasWalker, Rt Hon Harold (Doncaster)
Dubs, AlfredMagee, BryanWatkins, David
Dunnett, JackMarks, KennethWeetch, Ken
Dunwoody, Mrs GwynethMarshall, David (GI'sgow,Shett!es'n)Wellbeloved, James
Eadie, AlexMarshall, Dr Edmund (Goole)Welsh, Michael
Eastham, KenMarshall, Jim (Leicester South)White, Frank R. (Bury & Radcliffe)
Ellis, Raymond (NE Derbyshire)Martin, Michael (Gl'gow, Springb'rn)White, James (Glasgow, Pollok)
Ellis, Tom (Wrexham)Maxton, JohnWhitehead, Phillip
Evans, loan (Aberdare)Maynard, Miss JoanWhitlock, William
Evans, John (Newton)Meacher, MichaelWilley, Rt Hon Frederick
Ewing, HarryHellish, Rt Hon RobertWilliams, Rt Hon Alan (Swansea W)
Field, FrankMikardo, IanWilliams, Sir Thomas (Warrington)
Flannery, MartinMillan, Rt Hon BruceWilson, Rt Hon Sir Harold (Huyton)
Fletcher, Ted (Darlington)Miller, Dr M. S. (East Kilbride)Wilson, William (Coventry SE)
Fool, Rt Hon MichaelMitchell, Austin (Grimsby)Winnick, David
Ford, BenMitchell, R. C. (Solon, Itchen)Woolmer, Kenneth
Forrester, JohnMorris, Rt Hon Alfred (Wythenshawe)Wright, Sheila
Foster, DerekMorris, Rt Hon Charles (Openshaw)Young, David (Bolton East)
Foulkes, GeorgeMorris, Rt Hon John (Aberavon)
Fraser, John (Lambeth, Norwood)Morton, GeorgeTELLERS FOR THE AYES:
Garrett, John (Norwich S)Moyle, Rt Hon RolandMr. Joseph Dean and
Garrett, W. E. (Wallsend)Newens, StanleyMr. James Tinn.
George, Bruce
NOES
Aitken, JonathanFry, PeterMitchell, David (Basingstoke)
Alexander, RichardGardiner, George (Reigate)Moate, Roger
Ancram, MichaelGardner, Edward (South Fylde)Molyneaux, James
Arnold, TomGarel-Jones, TristanMonro, Hector
Aspinwall, JackGoodhart, PhilipMontgomery, Fergus
Atkins, Robert (Preston North)Goodhew, VictorMorris, Michael (Northampton, Sth)
Atkinson, David (B'mouth, East)Gorst, JohnMorrison, Hon Charles (Devizes)
Baker, Kenneth (St. Marylebone)Gow, IanMorrison, Hon Peter (City of Chester)
Baker, Nicholas (North Dorset)Gower, Sir RaymondMudd, David
Beaumont-Dark, AnthonyGray, HamishMurphy, Christopher
Bell, Sir RonaldGreenway, HarryMyles, David
Bendall, VivianGrieve, PercyNeale, Gerrard
Benyon, Thomas (Abingdon)Griffiths, Eldon (Bury St Edmunds)Needham, Richard
Benyon, W. (Buckingham)Griffiths, Peter (Portsmouth N)Nelson, Anthony
Berry, Hon AnthonyGrist, IanNeubert, Michael
Best, KeithGrylls, MichaelNewton, Tony
Bitten, Rt Hon JohnGummer, John SelwynOppenheim, Rt Hon Mrs Sally
Biggs-Davison, JohnHamilton, Hon Archie (Eps'm&Ew'll)Page, John (Harrow, West)
Blackburn, JohnHamilton, Michael (Salisbury)Page, Rt Hon Sir R. Graham
Blake-, PeterHannam,JohnPage, Richard (SW Hertfordshire)
Body, RichardHaselhurst, AlanParkinson, Cecil
Bonsor, Sir NicholasHavers, Rt Hon Sir MichaelParris, Matthew
Boscawen, Hon RobertHawksley, WarrenPatten, Christopher (Bath)
Bottomley, Peter (Woolwich West)Hayhoe, BarneyPatten, John (Oxford)
Bowden, AndrewHeddle, JohnPattie, Geoffrey
Boyson, Dr RhodesHenderson, BarryPawsey, James
Bright, GrahamHeseltine, Rt Hon MichaelPenhaligon, David
Brinton, TimHicks, RobertPercival, Sir Ian
Brittan, LeonHiggins, Rt Hon Terence L.Pollock, Alexander
Brocklebank-Fowler, ChristopherHogg, Hon Douglas (Grantham)Porter, George
Brooke, Hon PeterHooson, TomPowell, Rt Hon J. Enoch(S Down)
Brown, Michael (Brigg & Sc'thorpe)Hordern, PeterPrice, David (Eastleigh)
Browne, John (Winchester)Howell, Rt Hon David (Guildford)Prior, Rt Hon James
Bruce-Gardyne, JohnHowell, Ralph (North Norfolk)Proctor, K. Harvey
Buck, AntonyHunt, David (Wirral)Raison, Timothy
Budgen, NickHunt, John (Ravensbourne)Rathbone, Tim
Bulmer, EsmondIrving, Charles (Cheltenham)Rees, Peter (Dover and Deal)
Burden, F. A.Johnson Smith, GeoffreyRees-Davies, W. R.
Butcher, JohnJopling, Rt Hon MichaelRenton, Tim
Butler, Hon AdamKaberry, Sir Donald]Rhodes, James, Robert
Cadbury, JocelynKershaw, AnthonyRhys Williams, Sir Brandon
Carlisle, John (Luton West)King, Rt Hon TomRidley, Hon Nicholas
Carlisle, Kenneth (Lincoln)Kitson, Sir TimothyRidsdale, Julian
Carlisle, Rt Hon Mark (Runcorn)Knight, Mrs JillRifkind, Malcolm
Chalker, Mrs LyndaKnox, DavidRoberts, Michael (Cardiff NW)
Channon, PaulLamont. NormanRoberts, Wyn (Conway)
Chapman, SydneyLang, IanRoss, Wm. (Londonderry)
Churchill, W. S.Langford-Holt, Sir JohnRossi, Hugh
Clark, Hon Alan (Plymouth, Sutton)Latham, MichaelRost, Peter
Clark, Sir William (Croydon South)Lawrence, IvanSainsbury, Hon Timothy
Clarke, Kenneth (Rushcliffe)Lawson. NigelSt. John-Stevas, Rt Hon Norman
Clegg, Sir WalterLee, JohnScott, Nicholas
Colvin MichaelLe Marchant, SpencerShaw, Michael (Scarborough)
Cope, JohnLennox-Boyd, Hon MarkShelton, William (Streatham)
Come. JohnLester, Jim (Beeston)Shepherd, Colin (Hereford)
Costain, A.P.Lewis, Kenneth (Rutland)Shepherd, Richard (Aldridge-Br'hills)
Critchley. JulianLloyd, Ian (Havant & Waterloo)Shersby, Michael
Crouch, DavidLloyd, Peter (Fareham)Silvester, Fred
Dickens, GeoffreyLoveridge, JohnSkeet, T. H. H.
Dorrell, StephenLuce, RichardSpeller, Tony
Dover, DenshoreLyell, NicholasSpence, John
du Cann, Rt Hon EdwardMcCrindle, RobertSpicer, Michael (S Worcestershire)
Dunn, Robert (Dartford)Macfarlane, NeilSproat, Iain
Dykes, HughMacKay, John (Argyll)Squire, Robin
Eden, Rt Hon Sir JohnMcNair-Wilson, Michael (Newbury)Stainton, Keith
Edwards, Rt Hon N. (Pembroke)McNair-Wilson, Patrick (New Forest)Stanbrook, Ivor
Eggar, TimothyMcQuarrie, AlbertStanley, John
Elliott, Sir WilliamMadel, DavidSteen, Anthony
Emery, PeterMajor, JohnStevens, Martin
Fairbairn, NicholasMarlow, TonyStewart, Ian (Hitchin)
Fairgrieve, RussellMarshall, Michael (Arundel)Stewart, John (East Renfrewshire)
Faith, Mrs SheilaMather, CarolStokes, John
Farr, JohnMaude, Rt Hon Angus]Stradling Thomas, J.
Fell, AnthonyMawby, RayTapsell, Peter
Fenner, Mrs PeggyMawhinney, Dr BrianTebbit, Norman
Finsberg, GeoffreyMaxwell-Hyslop, RobinTemple-Morris, Peter
Fisher, Sir NigelMayhew, PatrickThatcher, Rt Hon Mrs Margaret
Fletcher, Alexander (Edinburgh N)Mellor, DavidThomas, Rt Hon Peter (Hendon S)
Fookes, Miss Janet]Meyer, Sir AnthonyThompson, Donald
Forman, NigelMiller, Hal (Bromsgrove & Redditch)Thorne, Nell (Ilford South)
Fowler, Rt Hon NormanMills, Iain (Meriden)Thornton, Malcolm
Fox, MarcusMills, Peter (West Devon)Townend, John (Bridlington)
Fraser, Peter (South Angus)Miscampbell, NormanTownsend, Cyril D. (Bexleyheath)
Trippier, DavidWaller, GarryWilkinson, John
Trotter, NevilleWalters, DennisWilliams, Delwyn (Montgomery)
Taylor, Teddy (Southend East)Ward, JohnWinterton, Nicholas
van Straubenzee, W. R.Watson, JohnWolfson, Mark
Vaughan, Dr GerardWells, John (Maidstone)Young, Sir George (Acton)
Viggers, PeterWells, Bowen (Hert'rd & Stev'nage)Younger, Rt Hon George
Waddington, DavidWheeler, John
Wakeham, JohnWhitney, RaymondTELLERS FOR THE NOES:
Waldegrave, Hon WilliamWickenden, KeithLord James Douglas-Hamilton and
Walker, Bill (Perth & E Perthshire)Wiggin, JerryMr. John MacGregor.

Question accordingly negatived.

Proposed amendment agreed to.