UK Parliament / Open data

Finance Bill

Proceeding contribution from John Redwood (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Monday, 23 April 2007. It occurred during Debate on bills on Finance Bill.
Again, the world has moved on. In 1997, companies did not have to put pension deficits on to their balance sheets, and neither did the Government, so there was symmetry. Now, companies have to put pension deficits on their balance sheets, whereas the Government do not. The other big difference is that, in 1997, most pension funds were in surplus, as there were not these huge liability problems; now, they are in massive deficit. I have been persuaded that it is right to recognise those deficits and to require that they are properly reported. The Government should have to produce an accurate and honest figure with their actuaries for the pension liability deficit in the public sector. Any sensible analyst would then add that to the borrowings through the gilt market that the Minister reported to the House. PFI liabilities are being understated. It is a question of the quality of the schemes and the likelihood of their going wrong, and the Government needing to spend a lot of money to reinstate the public services that were covered by them. There has been a massive build-up in PFI activity—the Minister will be proud of that—and it is now so important to the public accounts that it is misleading not to put on a much bigger figure for PFI liabilities on a contingent basis.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
459 c724-5 
Session
2006-07
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Legislation
Finance Bill 2006-07
Back to top