Lord Willetts (Con)

My Lords, a strong theme in this excellent report is the importance of people aged over 50 remaining in the workforce—the other NEETs—and the challenge in the report is clear. Perhaps I can make the Minister one specific Budget representation on this issue. At the moment, people with pension savings can access them without losing any tax reliefs from the age of 55. The Government are already planning to increase that to the age of 57. The report makes a strong case for increasing that age to 60. Will the Minister consider that option? Secondly, as we make progress on improving participation in the workforce, the issue of the pension age comes up. It is striking that, from April of this year, the pension age started increasing from 66 to 67 with no fuss and no dispute. Beyond that, there is an option of increasing the pension age to 68. The Government commissioned their obligatory review of the pension age from Suzy Morrissey. They have had that report for several months. It is absurd that we in this Chamber are discussing this issue and the Government have still not published that report. Can the Minister give the House an assurance that it will be published urgently, so it can inform debates such as the one we are currently having? Finally, and very briefly, as this is a report about long-term trends, I was surprised that there was no reference to the most significant long-term technological trends—notably, the developments in robotics. It is striking that, when you look around the world, the countries facing the most significant demographic crises—Japan, Korea, China and Italy—are also the world leaders in robotics. This is part of their strategy. I declare an interest as chairing the Regulatory Innovation Office, the government body that looks at regulatory barriers to new technologies. But you do not need to read dry reports on the issue. I strongly recommend the BBC series “Ann Droid”, which identifies one possible scenario which could be in existence by the dates which this report discusses. I personally do not think we are likely to have one single humanoid robot doing everything, but I can absolutely envisage robots interacting with lonely older people, with indefinite time to give to their attention, and assisting with physical social care. I urge that the Minister also incorporates technological possibilities in any considerations of ageing societies.