BBC On The Record - Broadcast: 08.04.01

Interview: ALISTAIR DARLING MP, Social Security Secretary.

Are the Government doing enough for pensioners?



JOHN HUMPHRYS: Alistair Darling, stakeholder pensions, a step in the right direction many people say - but - and this is a serious problem isn't it, it isn't going to attract enough people who are on modest incomes, ten thousand to twenty thousand pounds a year. It's not going to do it, is it? ALISTAIR DARLING: Stakeholder pensions were designed to be one part of a number of measures the government is introducing to make sure that people have a decent income in retirement. Now at the moment if..there are many people who don't have access to an occupational pension through their employer, people for whom a personal private pension are inappropriate because they tend to have higher charges and it was that gap in the market that stakeholder pensions are designed to meet. Now I believe that the signs so far are encouraging, two years' ago when we announced stakeholder pensions some people said 'oh you won't get anyone to sell them'. In fact there are now forty-four pension providers in the field and I believe that over the years, more and more people on moderate and higher earnings will get into funded pensions, of which stakeholder pensions are an important part, but of course they are not the whole story but they are an important part of it. HUMPHRYS: It's one thing to get people to sell them it's another thing to get people to buy them and you don't really think that people like that youngish woman we saw in the film there - Ruth - she said my income is completely taken up - I quote "with everyday expenses". So you can't expect people like her to buy into it can you. DARLING: Let me set out our strategy. The first thing that we did when we came into power was to sort out the problems that we inherited with a growing amount of pensioner poverty. That's why we introduced the Minimum Income Guarantee, that's why we have increased pensions for everyone to make sure that all pensioners shared in the rising prosperity. The second stage of our reform was to make sure that long-term pension provision was improved. Now we've done two things here. Firstly, as I said we have introduced stakeholder pensions to give millions of people access to a funded pension who at the moment don't have access to them. Remember one of the advantages of stakeholder pensions is that because of their very low charging, then people will actually get more pension for the amount of money that they put in. But, part of our long-term reform also as your report makes clear, is to introduce the state second pension which is specifically designed for people on low earnings, who don't have money to put by, to put into a funded pension and that state second pension actually doubles the amount of money people would have got under the Serps scheme. So we are helping people on low pay, we are helping people on moderate pay. The third stage, which we may come onto in this discussion of course, is the Pension Credit which will mean for the first time in the Social Security system, if you do actually do what governments have asked you to do over the years and you save for your retirement, you will get a credit, a reward for having done so rather than being penalised for that thrift which is the system that we took over. HUMPHRYS: But let me stay with the thought of stakeholder pensions for the moment and I am dealing here as you know, with people on what you would describe I think as modest incomes, that's to say ten to twenty thousand pounds a year. Your ambition if I may remind you was to ensure that everybody earning more than ten thousand pounds a year..twenty thousand pounds a year, should be and I quote "in a secure funded private pension". Now you are not talking about that as being a very clear ambition that they should all be in some sort of pension such as that. You are talking about it as an option. So you have in effect, scaled down your ambition haven't you. DARLING: No, let me be very clear about this. The government believes that if someone is on moderate or higher earnings then they ought to be in a funded pension. That's always been the position, set out clearly in the Green Paper we published in 1998, it was the position then, it is the position now. What I was saying to you was, stakeholder is one funded pension option, along with occupational pensions or personal private pensions and the way in which we have changed the rebate scheme, the amount of money that you get out of your National Insurance Contributions to go into your funded pension, means that there..you get a very good deal from the state as long..as well as with the tax relief you can get because you can contribute up to three thousand six hundred pounds a year. There are a lot of incentives there to encourage people to get into funded pensions... HUMPHRYS: ..but I mean - sorry - that idea of contributing three thousand six hundred pounds a year to people like Ruth is of course laughable. I mean as I've said to you, she told us she couldn't afford anything. So what do you say to people like her who is on a modest income and can't afford to pay into this scheme. DARLING: What I say, at the moment, assuming that that lady Ruth who you interviewed is employed, she is paying National Insurance Contributions. Now I have no idea what her earnings are and I certainly wouldn't seek to advise her from this distance on that basis, but if you get somebody who is employed, they are paying National Insurance, what I am saying to you is because of the way the system operates, somebody on modest earnings, between about ten thousand and twenty-two thousand pounds a year, would get an enhanced contribution from their National Insurance into a funded scheme were she to go into a stakeholder pension scheme. HUMPHRYS: She'll still have to pay. DARLING: I also said to you John that if she is earning less than that or you know she is on the sort of cusp if you like between lower and moderate earnings, then she might be better advised to stay in the state second pension, that's the reformed Serps system where she would actually be getting double the benefit than under the original Serps scheme. So what I am saying to you is, for someone on low earnings, or someone there or there abouts, she might be better off in the state scheme, but someone..generally speaking somebody as their earnings rise above that, then they would probably be better off in a funded scheme. Now what we have done is to ensure that the National Insurance rebate system and the tax system is designed to reward people if they actually do go into a stakeholder pension scheme. But whether or not it is appropriate for her, clearly I don't know because I don't know how much she earns. HUMPHRYS: Well we were assuming that she earns between ten and twenty, I think it's something like fifteen but of course I may be wrong about that, my apologies to her if I am wrong. But there are five million people who have no pension, apart from the basic state pension of course, no other pension apart from that. What do you want that figure... DARLING: If she is earning fifteen thousand pounds a year, if she goes into a stakeholder pension then the amount of money that she presently pays through her National Insurance scheme into the state system because I assume that's what her arrangements are at the moment, that would go in - if she went into a stakeholder scheme, into a funded pot and all the evidence is that somebody going into a funded pension, on that sort of earnings would do better than if they'd have stayed in the state scheme. Now, clearly I can't give her personal advice for obvious reasons but the way in which the National Insurance system works, which she pays anyway, is that if it went into a funded pension, then she might be better off as a result of that. And of course in years to come if her earnings increase, then it would almost certainly be the case that she can put additional money into a pension as she moves towards retirement. HUMPHRYS: But you know that there are many people like her who won't do that for whatever reason, it may simply be because they feel they can't afford to, so ultimately, you have to bit the bullet and say, it must be compulsory, mustn't you? DARLING: No, you see, if you are employed in this country at the moment, you have to contribute, there's no question, it's not voluntary, you have to pay National Insurance. So compulsion is already in the system and that lady Ruth, she's already obliged to pay National Insurance Contributions which goes into a state pension and about five per cent of it into her state second pension or Serps. What I'm saying to you is, that for moderate earners, someone earning more than about ten-thousand pounds a year, generally speaking, they will be better off in a funded pension. Ideally an occupational pension but clearly her employer doesn't have one of those, so from last Friday, stakeholder pensions are being set up, where these investments are all pooled, they're invested and generally speaking, all the evidence is that they get a better return. So compulsion isn't the issue because there's already compulsion in the system. What is at issue is the objective of making sure that more people on moderate and higher earnings are in funded pensions because they would be better off and to come back to the point you made right at your start to your programme, you are right in saying the government strategy is to make sure through a combination of state and funded provision, people have a much better income in retirement. The stakeholder is one part of achieving that objective. HUMPHRYS: And if they choose not, let me return to the question of compulsion, I take your point about the National Insurance pay-off, as it were, but if they choose not to do it, would you consider, at some stage, compulsion? If you discovered after a year or two years, or whatever it is, the thing simply isn't working, people aren't going for this, would you then consider compulsion? DARLING: As I said to you, people like Ruth have no option. If you are employed in this country, your employer takes your tax and your National Insurance Contributions away from you. Your National Insurance Contributions go into the National Insurance fund, which amongst other things pays for your basic state pension and the state second pension. So compulsion is there anyway. But I mean, the key point to focus on here is what we're doing is, as I say firstly we are making sure that for lower earners the state system is much much better than it ever was in the past because these people could never earn enough on their own, that's why we've increased the amount of benefit they get through the state second pension, it's almost doubled, trebled in some cases actually. What we're saying for moderate and higher earners is that you really ought to be in a funded pension and that's why stakeholder pensions have been introduced because at the moment, or up until Friday, people didn't have any choice in the matter, there was nowhere for them to invest their money. Now there are stakeholder pensions, they are low charges, one per cent, and that's already, you can see the effect of that across the whole industry now. They are portable, you can put money in, there are not penalties if you stop for a while and then contribute. So that it benefits low paid people, it benefits women who take time off to care for her children or for other relatives. These stakeholder pensions will be of immense benefit to the pensions system and as I say, they're giving options that were never never there in the past. HUMPHRYS: Let's look at the basic state pension then. You'd accept that secondary pensions can be a fairly complicated issue. The problem with the basic state pension now is that that too is very complicated because of all the means testing that is involved at various stages in the process. You were supposed, New Labour was supposed to move away from means testing, we have more now than we ever had before. DARLING: We don't actually, it's almost exactly the same as it was when we came into office because of course, what's happening is this - if you look at pensioner incomes today, the average pensioner income is a hundred-and-forty-one pounds a week. Now the reason it is that is because a lot of people are now retiring with very good occupational pensions. You know one in six pensioner couples are retiring on over twenty-one thousand pounds a year. The problem is, there's a lot of pensioners at the other end of the income scale, who only have the basic state pension, or in fact there's a million pensioners who don't even have that. Now a one-size fits all approach doesn't work. So what we've done is this. Firstly, you've got the Minimum Income Guarantee, which actually you can now complete a form that's only ten pages long, well from October, ten pages long, or you can apply for it over the phone, you've got... HUMPHRYS: ...and of which half a million people don't get still. DARLING: I'll come onto that point because I think that....those figures are misleading. We've got the Minimum Income Guarantee which from tomorrow goes up to ninety-two pounds fifteen a week. So what we're saying is no pensioner should be living on less than that. Now that ninety-two pounds fifteen a week compares to only about sixty-eight pounds that the Tories left us when they left office four years ago. So there is the Minimum Income Guarantee. That is the only way of getting money to the pensioners on low incomes. If you don't have the Minimum Income Guarantee, if you're opposed to it as the Tories are, then you will find that pensioner poverty will grow and I don't believe that pensioner poverty has any part in a civilised society... HUMPHRYS: ...yes but it... DARLING: ...the second thing you've got to do John, is to make sure that for those millions of pensioners and there's about five million of them, who've saved a little bit of money, they've got maybe a modest occupational pension, or they've got a little bit of money in the bank, that they're actually rewarded for their thrift. Under the present system, under the system we inherited from the Tories, they are punished because of it. When the pension credit comes in from 2003, then those pensioners will get an additional cash top-up. So the system is quite simple, Minimum Income Guarantee that ill rise to a hundred pounds in two years' time, the pension credit, which is designed to make sure that where people have saved modest sums, they get a cash top-up for having done it and the longer term reforms to make sure that everybody who can save has the opportunity to do so. HUMPHRYS: But the Minimum Income Guarantee is fine if you apply for it and if you get it but as you've acknowledged, many people don't do that, either because they think it's terribly complicated, or because they think, wrongly certainly, but nonetheless because they think it is in some way demeaning, so they don't do it. Let me remind you what Rodney Bickerstaffe said in that film, what most people want is a decent income so they don't have to rely on means tested benefits. The stigma of means testing that I call, he said, I call parading poverty. DARLING: Yes, but as Rodney well knows because I've had many hours of discussions with them, that the only way to help the generation of pensioners we now have who only had the state pension, or in some cases, not even that, including, you know, some of his own members, is to have the Minimum Income Guarantee. But you know let's deal with this point since you raised it. We wrote to two and a half million pensioners who we thought might be eligible for the Minimum Income Guarantee. Now just under a million responded. So the old argument that somehow it was stigma, or that people you know, didn't want to get in touch, you know, seems to me to have fallen away, because a million people got in touch with us. Now when we looked at the circumstances of those million people, what do we find. We find that most of them don't qualify because they've either got a modest occupational pension, or alternatively, they've got, you know, they've got some modest savings in the bank. Now when the pension credit comes in in two years' time, these people will be rewarded for their thrift. Let me give you an example. At the moment, if you've got an occupational pension of twenty pounds a week, going on top of your basic state pension, you get nothing for your thrift. Under the new system, that same person would get an extra twelve pounds a week to reward them for their thrift. Now I think the Social Security system ought to be rewarding thrift, not punishing it. Last point on this John, you talk about stigma, nobody has any compunction whatsoever about claiming tax allowances to which they're entitled. Nobody has any problem with that... HUMPHRYS: ...oh, different area... DARLING: ...well it's not because what we're saying is, that where you've got somebody on a low income then there is no reason whatsoever why they should not get that money then... HUMPHRYS: Well, why then, why did Tony Blair himself say three years ago - two-and-a-half years ago - there are problems if you move to too much means testing, as you can see with pensioners who do not take up Income Support. The Prime Minister thinks it's difficult. DARLING: It wouldn't surprise you to know that the Prime Minister finds himself in complete agreement with our pensions policy, but he won't ....... But the problem we inherited is that when we came into office there were about two million pensioners who were living on - their incomes were so low that they were on Income Support. Now, we've got to deal with that problem. You can take the Tory view and say, well we don't believe in giving these people any help, tough luck, we'll leave you to get on with it. That's what they did for their eighteen years. I believe that there should be a minimum, a guarantee for pensioners. Age Concern for example last year, said that they - that pensioners shouldn't live on less than ninety pounds a week. I agree. That's why from Monday, tomorrow the Minimum Income Guarantee will rise to over ninety-two pounds,. It will go up to a hundred pounds in two-thousand and three, but that on its own isn't enough. You've got make sure that where that nearly half the pensioner population has actually got modest savings or a modest occupational pension, you can't just say to these people: well, tough luck. You should say to these people: you've done what you were asked to do, now let's reward you for your thrift, let's not punish you as the Tories seem to want to do. HUMPHRYS: But many people believe that the basic state pension is what it should be all about, and this increase that we've now had, five pounds, is seen by many as a pre-election bribe. The reality is, isn't it, that you are not committed, you are not committed to increasing the basic state pension so that people won't have to worry about money in future. What this is, is leaving open the possibility that we might have another seventy-five per cent - a seventy-five pence increase for the next year's pension or the pension after that? DARLING: Well, despite what Willetts and Webb had to say, no party in this country is going to restore the earnings link. You know that's been the case for many years, and that's likely to remain the case. But... HUMPHRYS: So we won't have another seventy-five pence increase? DARLING: Let me directly answer your question. The problem is that the gap between pensioner incomes in this country, between the better off and the poorest is as wide, or was as wide in nineteen-ninety- seven as it was forty years earlier. To give the same amount to everyone the poorest and the richest alike doesn't make any sense. What we have done, and I think it's the right policy to pursue, is firstly to hugely increase the amount of money that the poorest pensioners get, as I say, up from sixty-eight pounds four years ago, all the Tories were prepared to allocate, up to ninety-two pounds-fifteen from tomorrow, and rising to a hundred pounds in two years' time. The second thing that we wanted to do was to make sure that those large number of pensioners that you know, were pretty - not well off - on modest incomes - should also see the fruits of their thrift, that's why we're doing the pension credit, and of course we've also made tax changes. Remember that seventy per cent of pensioners either pay no income tax or only at the ten pence rate, so we're helping those modest pensioners, but to give exactly the same to the poorest pensioner and to say, Margaret Thatcher, seems to me to be an absurd policy. HUMPHRYS: Okay. DARLING: Now I don't believe that, and it's not surprising actually that no major political party wants to return to that system. What is crucial though is to make sure we maintain and increase the Minimum Income Guarantee which the Tories oppose, to make sure that you make the long term reforms, so that people can save for the future, and at the same time make sure that saving and thrift and prudence are rewarded, that's what the pensioner credit does, and the increases in pension tomorrow, the five pounds for a single pensioner, the eight pounds for a pensioner couple and the increases planned for the following year are a step towards achieving a situation where all pensioners not only share in the country's wealth, but at the same time they can look forward to a decent income in retirement in the future. HUMPHRYS: Alistair Darling, many thanks. DARLING: Thank you.
NB. This transcript was typed from a transcription unit recording and not copied from an original script. Because of the possibility of mis-hearing and the difficulty, in some cases, of identifying individual speakers, the BBC cannot vouch for its accuracy.