Mr Michael Trend: I welcome the Under-Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions to the Dispatch Box for what I understand is his third Adjournment debate of the day. That will be good for the CV, if not one for the records. I am sure that he is the master of all the subjects in question. I am grateful to have the opportunity to bring back to the House a matter of the greatest concern...
Mr Michael Trend: The Under-Secretary will know that many people's views on the proposed new terminal 5 are profoundly and unfavourably influenced by the continued obstinacy of successive Governments on night flights. Why should the airport be allowed to expand, with all that might follow, when the Government still compel Heathrow to be such a bad night-time neighbour? The Under-Secretary will know also that...
Mr Michael Trend: It is a great pleasure to follow the hon. Member for Bolton, South-East (Dr. Iddon) and I have much sympathy with most of what he said. I shall come to the Bland judgment, but perhaps the House needs to look at double effect again and debate how it is developing. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Congleton (Mrs. Winterton) first and foremost on her good fortune in securing victory...
Mr Michael Trend: There has been a good deal of discussion about that today. The question of which hon. Member present we would like to have as our doctor has arisen frequently.
Mr Michael Trend: I think that my hon. Friend is being mischievous, although amusingly so.
Mr Michael Trend: I do not think that my hon. Friend was questioning the hon. Gentleman's medical qualifications; I think that he was questioning his party allegiance, which many people find curious. I read the Bland judgment with as much care as I could devote to it. It is a terrible case. When one reads about it, one's heart goes out to the family of the young boy, especially his father—and also to the...
Mr Michael Trend: Does my right hon. and learned Friend accept that some of the cases that have been in the media recently, if they are true, might have been caused, at least in part, by the Bland judgment?
Mr Michael Trend: The Minister told us some weeks ago that he was looking with urgency at the position of war widows, in whose circumstances I know that he is deeply interested. Does he now agree with us that war widows should be allowed to retain their husbands' occupational pensions, or will that possibility be lost from sight again?
Mr Michael Trend: I want to speak, albeit briefly, in support of the Lords amendment, which is a great modification on the original. It tightens still further the ring fence around the group of war widows represented so well by the War Widows Association of Great Britain. Let us be clear that we are talking about post-1973 widows of service men who die or are killed in the line of duty while still serving....
Mr Michael Trend: I do not accept that there has been a change of mind between the two teams. This is the first time that the House of Commons has had a chance to debate and take a view on the new amendment. It clarifies in an important way the most important feature, which is the ring fence. If the ring fence is solid and in place and if the Government are determined to keep to it, it is sufficient. We all...
Mr Michael Trend: The Government try to be the little friend of all the world, but, tonight, they have voted against the disabled, war widows and the bereaved and, now, they are showing that they are no friends of entrepreneurs, or small business men. The Government are trying to have it both ways. On Monday, the Chancellor of the Exchequer trumpeted a £40 million tax break for entrepreneurs, but, just two...
Mr Michael Trend: My hon. Friend makes his own point extremely well. If the Minister had met the hundreds of people involved in the issue who had the time and ability to come to the House today, he would have seen literally scores of people—honest, hard-working entrepreneurs—who were incredibly angry with the Government, who they feel have fingered them for a stealth tax. Those people are not artful tax...
Mr Michael Trend: The Government's acceptance of the proposal demonstrates that they have not taken on board the detailed criticisms of the proposal's effects on the knowledge-based economy. We should also note that, despite the changes made in the other place, the bottom line remains the same. The Red Book stated that, in the first year, the proposal would enable a tax grab of £475 million. Less than two...
Mr Michael Trend: I agree with my hon. Friend. There is no telling where the proposals might lead. I shall come to his point in a minute. The proposals deserve detailed examination. It is unjust to Members of Parliament that the proposals have never been given proper consideration. It is also unjust to those who work in the knowledge-based economy, who have been treated high-handedly. We shall seek to get the...
Mr Michael Trend: The Opposition have made that point frequently. Now that the Contributions Agency has been transferred, it seems more logical than ever that the issue should be dealt with in a Finance Bill. The Inland Revenue aspects of the proposal will have to be dealt with in that way, so we shall revisit the issue many times next year, I suspect. There are several important points that the Government...
Mr Michael Trend: The Opposition agree with the Lords amendment. Those who follow these matters in detail will realise that it represents a change in our policy—indeed, a change since the proposal was debated, very recently, in another place. I am quietly proud to be able to tell the House of that change, but well aware that mere good fortune has enabled me to voice what many Conservatives, on both Front and...
Mr Michael Trend: If amendment No. 3, which was introduced in the Lords by the Government, is defective, I wonder whether amendment (a) in my name is doubly defective. However, I shall seek to persuade the Minister that the age-75 rule should be abolished for all money purchase pensions, and not only stakeholder pensions, as the Lords amendment suggests. I was pleased to hear the Minister mention Dr. Oonagh...
Mr Michael Trend: I welcome the Minister to his first Question Time in his current capacity. On appointment, he was the fourth pensions Minister in 27 months, so I wish him luck. I understand that the Minister may be reluctant to adopt a position that is being urged on him by the Opposition, but has he decided whether pensioners, and stakeholder pensioners in particular, should be obliged to take their...
Mr Michael Trend: I seek clarification about what will occur in the case of overpayment. The Minister said, in a rather sinister manner, that he was putting matters in hand. What will happen to people who have been overpaid a relatively modest amount, who have spent the money in good faith because they did not understand the original advice that they should hold back, and who did not know their genuine...
Mr Michael Trend: Following the Minister's reply to my hon. Friend the Member for Ruislip-Northwood (Mr. Wilkinson), let me say that surely a basic premise of the stakeholder pension scheme is that it will be popular because there will be a set 1 per cent. annual charge. Will the Minister confirm that the Government are sticking to, and will continue to stick to, that 1 per cent. figure?
