A Pensions Commission chaired by Lord Turner of Ecchinswell proposed last November that the

A Pensions Commission chaired by Lord Turner of Ecchinswell proposed last November that the state pension age for men and women should rise from 65 to 66 by 2030, to 67 by 2040 and to 68 by 2050. “Nor is disclosure needed where it would prejudice the UK’s relations with other countries.”. “But I have also concluded that the arguments for maintaining the exemptions are sufficiently powerful that the balance of the competing public interests does not require the disclosure of those parts of the requested information which were of a preliminary, provisional or tentative nature or which may reveal legal risks, reservations or possible counter-argument. “As the Government chose to outline an unequivocal legal position, on such a critical issue at such a critical time, the balance of the public interest calls for disclosure of the recorded information which lay behind those views. “By this means the public can better understand the background and rationale behind that published statement and the extent to which reliance upon those final conclusions was in fact justified. He went on: “My conclusion is that the balance of the competing public interest tests calls for disclosure of the recorded information which led to, or supported, the concluded views which were made public by the Attorney General in his 17 March statement. Mr Thomas said today that it was an “exceptional, complex and sensitive case” which had raised many issues.

The notice required publication of a disclosure statement containing “the substance of information” which led to Lord Goldsmith’s written answer to the House of Lords on 17 March. He added: “There is a public interest in establishing the extent to which published statements are consistent with fuller advice that had been given.” The Attorney’s General’s office was served with an enforcement notice upholding complaints under the Freedom of Information Act. The Attorney General’s office was ordered today to disclose information leading to his advice on the legality of invading Iraq in 2003. Information Commissioner Richard Thomas upheld requests for an explanation of Lord Goldsmith’s statement to Parliament on 17 March in that year.
In a letter to the Legal Secretariat to the Law Officers, Mr Thomas said the Attorney General’s confidential advice to the Government, on 7 March, had been “significantly more equivocal in nature”. Mr Hutton congratulated Sir John on what he had done for pensioners, but said the date of 2012 had been agreed as part of the affordability issue.. Those who fought in the last war and who created the conditions of freedom we now enjoy will be in their 90s before the earnings link is reintroduced.” He asked whether it was possible to bring the date forward. On the question of the return of the link with earnings, he said: “I am concerned that it is going to take so long.

“We agree fundamentally that the direction you are taking on pensions is the right one.” He said they also wanted to find as much cross-party consensus as possible. Mr Hutton said he was grateful for the Liberal Democrats’ support. Sir John Butterfill (C Bournemouth West) and chairman of the all-party pensions group, said it was a very thoughtful package which he welcomed. The Liberal Democrat spokesman, David Laws said there was a very great deal in the White Paper that his party welcomed and agreed with, although they did have some concerns. He spoke, too, of the “extraordinary support” on their side of the House for the part of the statement that Labour wished to give much greater justice to working women. On the question of public service pensions, Mr Hutton reminded Mr Hammond that before the general election the Conservative Party had said they had no plans to change these pensions.

Now, with the election behind them, the Tories were saying something different. Frank Field (Lab Birkenhead) a former Welfare Minister, congratulated Mr Hutton on trying to make a silk purse out of a pig’s ear. We are willing to engage in that process if the Government is willing to do so with us.” Mr Hutton agreed that the affordability of the system was “absolutely a fundamental issue”. “We cannot be bound by a deal based on favours and not fairness.” He went on: “It is now our duty to do what is right for the long-term interests of Britain and that means building that cross-party consensus.

We will not make promises which we cannot deliver.” Mr Hammond said that if there was to be an affordability issue, there had to be transparency about the cost and financing of the package. He said the package improved the situation for women with broken contribution records – “and we welcome that”. He accused the Government of saying nothing about public service pensions. “Can this Government really look the British public in the eye and tell them they have to work until they are 68 when they cravenly surrendered to pressures from the public service unions about their pensions?” Mr Hammond said that public sector workers should share in shouldering the burden. “No party which seriously aspires to be in Government can take any risks with the public finances or the stability of the economy.