Equitable Life (Payments) Bill Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: HM Treasury
Wednesday 10th November 2010

(13 years, 6 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Chris Leslie Portrait Chris Leslie
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Having clearly touched a nerve, it will be interesting to hear from other Members as well.

Margot James Portrait Margot James (Stourbridge) (Con)
- Hansard - -

There is a key point for the victims of this scandal in my constituency of Stourbridge. Most of those whom I have met understand that the commitments that were given always had the proviso of the state of the public finances. That is a very relevant point.

I wish so much that we could have offered people more, but given the difference between Chadwick’s recommendations, which were the baseline, and the £1.5 billion, as well as the state of the public finances, many people who have suffered in this scandal will feel that they have been treated reasonably, although I accept the hon. Gentleman’s assessment that the EMAG pressure group is still battling for more. That is its role as a pressure group.

Chris Leslie Portrait Chris Leslie
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

A reasonable point from the hon. Lady. All I am saying is that the pledge that some Members signed did not say explicitly, “As resources allow.” [Interruption.] No, it does not say that in the pledge. The pledge simply says that they will have a fair and transparent payments scheme. I doubt very much that the vast majority of those other policyholders who will not be getting the 100%—clearly it will be welcomed by those with-profits annuitants, who are receiving 100% of their relative losses—but may be receiving, I am told, between 15 and 20% of their relative losses will feel that hon. Members who raised their hopes are actually fulfilling them.