Member

Those campaigning on behalf of the members of this scheme reject this particular approach, but to my mind it is very similar to the problem with PPF schemes and pre-1997 increases in PPF schemes. I think we understand that they were entitled to increases pre-1997, but they are not going to get those increases now, so some redress should be paid. I support the objective of providing redress for these scheme members, who clearly have lost out through no fault of their own. They were given advice. I need to be very careful in what I say here because I need to avoid being critical of fellow actuaries, but there is no doubt that the Government Actuary’s Department was telling people—it provided the advice—that the benefits in this new scheme would be broadly comparable to those that they had in the previous scheme. It was on that assurance of broad comparability that people transferred.