Superannuation Bill Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Cabinet Office
Tuesday 7th September 2010

(14 years, 2 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
John McDonnell Portrait John McDonnell
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I will not quote the figures again, but I refer the hon. Gentleman to the income data survey. I am happy to provide him with a PCS briefing that sets out the figures. [Interruption.] Well, the briefing is based on information independently issued by the income data survey.

In the executive grades, supervisors in the public sector—people with vocational qualifications—earn 18% less than supervisors in the private sector. The decision to go into the public sector, as I have said, is based on a judgment in the round about security, benefits, pensions and, yes, redundancy payments, which are described as accrued benefits that people earn over time. They are part of their wages. What is happening today is a Government unilaterally tearing up the contract that was entered into when many of these civil servants entered employment. I think that that will be open to challenge on the grounds of human rights compliance. Inevitably, members not just of the PCS but of other unions will wish to exercise their rights in law. What is happening is the worst of all worlds for civil servants.

Andrew Bridgen Portrait Andrew Bridgen (North West Leicestershire) (Con)
- Hansard - -

Does the hon. Gentleman believe that it is fair or affordable in the current economic situation for anyone to be given six years’ pay as redundancy pay?

John McDonnell Portrait John McDonnell
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Perhaps the hon. Gentleman was not listening. The period of six years has been used time and again to justify the measure. A tiny number of cases are involved, but we would like the exact number. If he can help us to extract that information from his own Ministers, that would be useful.

The vast bulk of civil servants who have been made redundant have been laid off on conditions of no more than three years’ pay, and the majority of them on considerably less. Under the terms of this measure, that will be reduced by two thirds. It is not about the tiny minority who receive six years’ pay, but about the vast majority who will lose up to two thirds of their payment.