The SNP government found itself unwittingly dragged into the pensions dispute today when it emerged that ministers had suggested a range of options to help deal with the UK’s pensions black hole – all of them far tougher than the plans backed by the UK government.
John Swinney, Scotland’s finance secretary, has tried to stay out of the pensions dispute – which will escalate with a massive public sector strike tomorrow.
Millions of public sector workers will go out on strike to protest at the plans to get them to work longer and contribute a larger proportion of their salaries for their pensions.
Mr Swinney has insisted that he does not support the UK government’s pension reform plans, but neither does he back strike action.
Mr Swinney – and first minister Alex Salmond – have tried to sit on the fence on this issue, glad to have it portrayed as a battle between the Tory-led government at Westminster and public sector unions.
But it has now emerged that the Scottish government’s pensions body, the Scottish Public Pensions Agency (SPPA), put forward a series of possible options to help ease the financial burden of public sector pensions to Lord Hutton’s review into pensions – the review which paved the way for the UK government’s current approach.
Among the suggestions were:
● Moving to a defined contribution scheme. This would be much more like most private sector schemes and would leave many public sector workers considerably worse off as a result.
● Reducing the burden on the public sector employers (the taxpayer) and increasing the contributions from employees.
● Reducing the benefits available to pensioners, but not reducing the size of their contributions.
● Introducing later retirement ages.
Opposition politicians seized on the SPPA’s submission to accuse the SNP administration of “hypocrisy”.
“All of the options are demonstrably worse than the ones that are going to be going ahead," said Tory MSP Gavin Brown. "If you’d suggested going to defined contribution, instead of defined benefit, you’d get strung up. The UK government hasn’t gone anywhere near suggesting something like that.
“The SNP have been doing an awful lot of grandstanding. I think it’s just utter hypocrisy to be as vocally critical of the UK government, yet their own government agency is suggesting this, which would have a far bigger impact on the wallets of public sector workers.”
And Richard Baker, for Labour, said: “John Swinney and the SNP positions on the pension dispute smacks of hypocrisy.
“Now we know the SNP actually proposed to the Hutton inquiry that the UK government remove pension guarantees for public sector workers.
“John Swinney and the SNP have sat on the fence and refused to join Scottish Labour and support the STUC’s day of action. Their only real difference with the Tories is the timescale of the pensions levy.
“John Swinney had a clear choice and the SNP have decided not to oppose David Cameron’s government outright on the pensions dispute. All they have asked for is a delay.”
However, a spokesman for the Scottish government argued that the suggestions represented a “broad spectrum of theoretical options for information”.
He said: “No preference was stated. The Scottish government has been absolutely clear in its opposition to the UK government’s proposals to increase employee contributions, which ministers regard as a naked cash-grab by UK ministers, driven not by the need for sensible and fair long-term pensions reform but by deficit-reduction targets.”
Donate to us: support independent, intelligent, in-depth Scottish journalism from just 3p a day
Related posts: