Superannuation Bill

Memorandum submitted by Roni Garcia (SU 01)

1 – Summary – I am an existing civil servant, middle management, earning significantly less than a Member of Parliament, and I may be adversely affected by the proposed bill. Whereas I fully agree and support the need to focus/reduce public expenditure I believe the current proposals will not achieve its stated objective and penalise those earning less than £50,000. I suggest that the existing level of protection is kept but a cap on the maximum payment is made. To be fair and to lead by example the total should be no more than the Prime Minister’s yearly salary. If this cannot be achieved it the cap should be equal to the yearly income of a Member of Parliament or Junior Minister.

2 - I believe that limiting the total payment to be equivalent of the Prime Minister’s salary will mean that those earning a significantly above the national average will not cost the taxpayer exorbitant funds should he/she be made redundant.

3 – The proposed cap will ensure that sufficient funds are available to those made redundant; this in turn could save the taxpayer money spent on benefits (housing, unemployment, etc) until the person finds employment.

4 – This option will appear to be fair and no-one should, even when made redundant, get more than our Prime Minister. Staff union will probably agree as most members will not be affected by the cap.

5 – There will be significant cost (opportunity cost of all involved, including both houses) as no significant changes, apart from the cap, is required.

September 2010