Contribution
My Lords, I begin by echoing the welcome of the noble Baroness, Lady Neville-Rolfe, and others for the report. I congratulate the noble Lords, Lord Liddle and Lord Wood of Anfield, on bringing it to the House today. I thank all noble Lords who have contributed to what has been a thoughtful and wide-ranging debate. As a new boy, I am struck by how coming to a debate in the House of Lords always opens up new issues around things you thought you had studied. I will aim to address the points that have been made—although I may not be able to namecheck everyone—and the excellent speeches made by noble Lords, such as that from the noble Baroness, Lady Prashar, which were very broad in terms of thinking about how to deal with this issue.
I begin where many noble Lords—in particular, the noble Lord, Lord Burns—began: with some optimism. The fact that we, as a society, are living longer is one of the great achievements of the modern age. I have two little twin granddaughters, Grace and Astrid. The noble Lord, Lord Liddle, explained to me that they can expect a lifespan of 90 years, which is an absolute triumph of public health, medical science and rising living standards. People having longer, healthier and more fulfilling lives has been an objective of everybody and of every party, I think—one that we want to promote. This Government remain committed to that goal.
However, that brings with it new and mounting pressures on public services and public finances not just here but, as the noble Baroness, Lady Bottomley, and the noble Lord, Lord Razzall, pointed out, in lots of countries across the developed world. The Government do not shy away from the reality, which is that addressing this challenge is not straightforward. It is not just about addressing the pension age, although that is an important part of what we have to do, or addressing fertility. I was interested in the speech from the noble Baroness, Lady Nargund. I had not thought about that issue before, so I would be more than pleased to talk to her about it or arrange for her to talk to somebody in the Government with greater expertise on it than me. The noble Baronesses, Lady Penn and Lady Meyer, also talked about this issue.
As I say, though, this is not just about the pension age or fertility. An ageing society touches on nearly every area of public policy. It would be wrong of me to suggest that there is one lever that can resolve it alone, however important it may be; that was, I think, the key point in the committee’s report. In order for this to work, we need to think also about how we can keep people, particularly older people, in work for longer and how we can deal with caring and social care. There is a circularity here, because the people who are not working are often looking after their parents. We need to think about how we can address discrimination and about life planning from education, which was mentioned by the noble Baroness, Lady Neville-Rolfe, as well as keeping people in employment.
I wish to talk about some of those points and the Government’s approach. I will not touch on housing, which I know is important and was raised by the noble Lord, Lord Best, or technology, which was raised by the noble Lord, Lord Willetts. I would like to talk about how we can look after people in old age. How can we support them to keep working? How can we provide adequate pensions? More broadly, how can we promote prosperity and keep the dependency ratio down by focusing on the denominator?
I shall start with social care, about which many noble Lords—including the noble Lords, Lord Burns, Lord Lamont and Lord Liddle—talked. There is a big gap in welfare provision. People are seeing everything they have worked for be wiped out by the costs of social care, which are increasing hugely. This issue was raised by the noble Baronesses, Lady Thornton and Lady McGregor-Smith, the noble Lord, Lord Willetts, and the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Coventry. We must think about the technical solutions and not forget that old people, like all people, are of immeasurable worth.
Our Prime Minister has set out his personal commitments to making progress on fixing our broken social care system. He has agreed with the noble Baroness, Lady Casey, to bring the conclusion of the independent commission forward to 2027 in order to help with that. This will combine the work that was originally set out as two separate phases, so that a single set of recommendations will cover both the immediate improvements, which the system needs now, and the longer-term transformations that are required to meet demographic changes. The same pressures are bearing down on the National Health Service, and a series of actions is taking place there. That is all from me on social care.
What about keeping people working? I must start by addressing ill health. The noble Lord, Lord Kakkar, introduced fantastic expertise to this debate. Last year, the Government set out a 10-year health plan. They remain committed to supporting people to lead healthier lives. In the 2025 Budget, there was an increase of £29 billion in annual cash resources by 2028-29. The Department of Health and Social Care is bringing £13.4 billion of public health funding into the public health grant, and £800 million is being put into the treatment of mental health. I know that I am quoting inputs rather than outputs, because we do not know what the outputs will be, but I feel that there is a commitment to try to address these issues.
I turn to pensions. We have had a big debate about the triple lock, and I thank the noble Lords, Lord Redwood and Lord Turnbull, and the noble Baroness, Lady Coffey, for their input on that. As noble Lords know, the Government made a manifesto commitment that, until the end of this Parliament, the triple lock will remain. The noble Lord, Lord Tugendhat, made an interesting suggestion about a cost-benefit analysis, and the noble Lord, Lord Willetts, asked what the retirement age will be. That has been delayed because of the Pensions Commission.
Last summer, it was announced that the Government had launched a Pensions Commission to review the state pension age. The pension age review feeds into the Pensions Commission, which will advise the Government early next year on how the state pension age and wider pensions policy framework should adapt to trends to ensure that pensioners have adequate incomes in future, while ensuring fairness and fiscal sustainability.
The danger is that this feels like just another grand review. The noble Baroness, Lady Penn, and the noble Lord, Lord Macpherson, raised that. I have a long paragraph on all the things that are happening in pensions right now. Many foundation stones are being put in place: mandating value-for-money reporting; trustees giving people guidance on how to get a pension out of their pension savings; and CDC collective pensions that will give people an income for life rather than cash. Lots of stuff is already going on. There is also, as the noble Baroness, Lady Neville-Rolfe, said, financial education for the young so that they know what is going on as well.
I am running out of time. Noble Lords will be aware of many of the things that the Government are doing on the economy. It is growth in every postcode, which I hope addresses the point raised by my noble friend Lord Sikka. The noble Baroness, Lady Neville-Rolfe, is right to hold us to account. This is not procrustean. We are looking after everyone in every postcode.
Let me skip forward, if I may. A lot is going on with young people. We have talked about education. There is the youth guarantee, the growth skills levy and investing in training. More broadly, the Government recognise the importance of ensuring that every young person can make a successful transition to work. That is what Sir Alan Milburn’s review will be doing. Given that this is such a cross-cutting challenge, consideration of how we tackle the ageing population is embedded everywhere—in growth, pensions, health and social care and labour markets. It is also embedded in housing. We are not following one of the recommendations of the committee with a grand plan. My noble friend Lord Davies recognised this. However, the Government recognise that this is a big challenge.
An ageing society is a symptom of success. It is a matter for celebration. It is a result of the determination of a great nation to improve living standards for everyone. We have not solved all the problems—and I have not addressed them all in this speech. However, we have some strong foundations, not least in your Lordships’ report keeping an active debate going and in action by the Government. I trust that Grace and Astrid can not only expect longer lives than their granddad but healthier and more fulfilling ones. Thank you.