Our Soldiers deserve better

HUGH ROBERTSON ATTACKS THE GOVERNMENT'S APPROACH TO FORCES PENSIONS

Hugh Robertson today attacked the government’s approach to armed forces pensions in a debate in the House of Commons. His remarks came as part of the Second Reading of the Armed Forces (Pensions and Contributions) Bill.

Hugh is uniquely placed to comment. He served in the Army for 10 years before leaving to work for Schroders, where he became an Assistant Director dealing with pension funds.

He said that it was vital that the government recognised that the armed forces both are different and need to be different. This is because they are expected to fight, and on occasion to die, for their country. As a result, Parliament owes them an extra duty of care over and above anyone else.

Furthermore, unlike any other public sector workers, the armed forces have no trade union or similar body. Parliament is, therefore, the only body capable of representing their interests.

Hugh went on to list a number of specific concerns. These included:

1. The decision to raise the age at which pensions are paid from 60 to 65.

2. The lack of independent governance. Apart from Parliament, there is no body to safeguard the interests of servicemen and women – leaving them open to attack by the treasury.

3. The lack of opportunity to earn a full career pension. Only a tiny proportion of servicemen will earn the full 2/3 of salary which is the Treasury guideline.

4. The fact that the bill is only an ‘enabling’ measure and lacks real detail. This allows the Secretary of State to change the details at will without consulting Parliament.

Hugh said: “We expect our armed forces to fight and, occasionally, to die for our country. That commitment must be rewarded by security in their retirement.

“This review has been conducted on a basis of cost rather than what the armed forces deserve. This is greatly to be regretted.”