The Government is yet to be defeated on any of its main proposals. It tottered towards defeat over the introduction of top-up fees for universities. After weeks of haggling, bullying, screaming and cajoling, the Government managed to squeeze through with a majority of five. Labour has a majority of 167 over all other parties in the House of Commons.

Since early 2002 Pensions Week has both highlighted and campaigned for justice for those members of occupational pension schemes that have been wound-up, leaving the membership with little or nothing to show for what is sometimes a working life time’s membership. In response to this campaign, I introduced, in December 2002, a Pensions (Winding-Up) Bill. The Bill established a protection fund, limited the fees of advisors who had to be used to wind-up pension schemes, and lifted pension debts above many other debts owed by the parent company in the creditor priority order.

The Bill also proposed a levy on unclaimed assets held by banks and building societies. The purpose of the levy was to create a fund separate from the monies that will be raised by an insurance levy on occupational schemes still in existence.

My Bill accepted that the clearest distinction should be made between these two necessary funds. An insurance fund to protect future liability could be put at risk if the cost of compensating members who had already lost all or part of their occupational pension was put into the same scheme.

Early last Thursday morning, as dawn was breaking over the House of Commons, the Government published its long awaited Pensions Bill. Such a bill is necessary as both of the main political parties have played a major part in destabilizing occupational pension schemes. The Tories imposed a tax levy on schemes whose assets were valued at over 105 per cent of their liabilities. Undeterred, Gordon Brown then came crashing down on these slim-downed pension schemes by taxing them by up to an additional £5bn a year.

The Government’s new Bill is totally inadequate on two fronts. It does nothing to begin building a sustainable pension’s policy. Such a strategy must offer the prospect of every individual, who has paid their contributions, gaining a pension that would take them above means-tested welfare in retirement.

Likewise, it does nothing to compensate those members of occupational schemes who have seen their pension promise snatched away from them in large part by the crass actions of Tory and Labour Governments.

This brings the debate back to the difficulties the Government is having in getting its legislation through the Commons. I shall be tabling an amendment to the Pensions Bill, instructing the Government to levy unclaimed assets in banks and building societies, which will be voted upon at what is called the ‘Report Stage’ of the Bill.

In introducing the Government’s measure, Andrew Smith, the Work and Pensions Secretary of State, announced yet again that the Government was still in listening mode on how to compensate the tens of thousands of members who have lost all or part of their pension entitlement when their scheme was wound-up. The Government needs to get serious on this issue, and bring forward its own proposals.

If it does not, my guess is that it will suffer its first major defeat when MPs insist that those of their constituents who have lost their pensions, but were compelled by law to join such schemes, are properly compensated.

MPs will vote for the amendment because justice demands such an action. But the next election will be the first one in which pensioners make up the majority of voters. If nothing else, that should concentrate wonderfully the minds of MPs.