Health Secretary Andrew Lansley has attacked the government's public sector pension changes in a private letter.
He told Treasury Chief Secretary Danny Alexander that parts of the reforms were "inappropriate" and "unrealistic".The letter, obtained by the Daily Telegraph, said the proposals would hit female health workers in particular.
The Department of Health said Mr Alexander had committed to protect the pensions of the low paid since the letter was written two months ago.
Mr Lansley said in the memo that the plans did not meet the coalition's "commitment to maintain gold-standard pensions".
His reaction came after a document outlining the reforms was given to cabinet members.
'Fiscal pressure' Mr Lansley wrote: "The paper... assumes that public sector workers, many of whom are women, will work a 48-year career [to get a full pension].
"In the NHS currently, the average full-time career for those taking a pension is only 18 years and it seems unrealistic to suggest that pension scheme design should be based on the assumption that a predominantly female workforce would need to work full-time, 48-year careers in future to receive a full pension.
"It is also difficult to see how this meets our commitment to maintain gold-standard pensions."
Mr Lansley said there was the potential for a "real risk" of industrial action among staff providing key public services.He added: "There is also the risk that lower-paid staff in particular will simply opt out, leaving HMT [HM Treasury] with reduced receipts in the short term while still having to pay for past pension promises.
"In the NHS, if it appears that we intend to significantly reduce the value of future accrual we also face the risk of opt-out from higher-paid groups as well as the lower-paid.
"GPs for instance pay both employer and employee contributions and can choose to invest them elsewhere or take them as pay.
"This would create a significant fiscal pressure in the short to medium term and in respect of lower-paid staff who opt out would increase pressure on the social security budget in the longer term."
'Deep split' Liberal Democrat Mr Alexander revealed details of the reforms last month, following a report to the government by former Labour minister Lord Hutton.
Public sector workers would retire later, contribute more to schemes and receive pensions based on average career earnings rather than final salary.
Trade unions have threatened national strikes in the autumn against the pension changes
The Unison union, which represents more than 400,000 NHS staff, said the letter showed how "unjust, unreasonable and unworkable" the proposals were.
A spokeswoman said: "The move to make public sector workers pay more into their pensions, work longer and get less, is driven by ideology - that is the Treasury wants to use the money saved to pay for the country's deficit."
Shadow work and pensions secretary Liam Byrne told the Telegraph: "We now know that there is a deep split at the heart of government on these pension negotiations.
"People will want to know why Andrew Lansley has sat on his hands when he secretly believes that other cabinet ministers are seeking a head-on confrontation with public sector workers.
"This is chaotic and reckless government."
'Best available' The Department of Health said things had "moved on" since the letter was written.
A spokesman said: "Last month, the chief secretary set out the government's commitment to protect the low-paid and ensure low and middle income earners get a pension at retirement broadly as good as they get now.
"And less than 10 days ago the whole of cabinet signed up to the need for pension reform and agreed to further talks taking place on a scheme-by-scheme basis."
"The government is committed to public service pensions remaining among the very best available.
"But people are living longer which means pensions are costing taxpayers more. So it is only fair that public service workers pay more towards them."
0 comments:
Post a Comment