If hon. Members did not give mini speeches in the middle of my speech, I could reach my conclusions. I will answer the hon. Gentleman’s question in due course. We cannot look at the changes to women’s state pension age in isolation without acknowledging the significant changes in life expectancy in recent years, the huge progress made in opening up employment opportunities for women and the wider package of reforms. First, on life expectancy, the reason for all these significant reforms is that people are not just living longer but are staying healthy for longer. In just a decade, the length of time for which 65-year-olds will live in good health has surged by more than a year. That is welcome news, but it puts increasing pressure on the state pension scheme, and the Government—any Government—have a duty to ensure the sustainability of the state pension system. It would have been irresponsible for this Government, or the then coalition Government, to have ignored those developments.
Transitional State Pension Arrangements for Women
Proceeding contribution from
Shailesh Vara
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 24 February 2016.
It occurred during Opposition day
and
e-petition debate on Transitional State Pension Arrangements for Women.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
606 c334 
Session
2015-16
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2022-04-17 02:30:32 +0100
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2016-02-24/16022449000439
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2016-02-24/16022449000439
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2016-02-24/16022449000439