Reform’s
public-sector pensions plan could cost billions extra, union warns
Prospect
says proposals to make payouts less generous would damage public finances
rather than save money
Rowena
Mason Whitehall editor
Wed 5 Nov
2025 19.30 GMT
Reform
UK’s plans to make public-sector pensions less generous could cost billions
extra a year and cause a ticking timebomb in the public finances, a leading
trade union has warned.
Prospect
said the plans unveiled by the party’s deputy leader, Richard Tice, would
damage the public finances rather than save money “and end up costing taxpayers
tens of billions of pounds in the years to come”.
The union
challenged Tice after he said he would want to change public-sector pensions
from a defined benefit system to a defined contribution scheme for new
entrants, a move that would mirror what has happened in the private sector and
would result in less generous payouts in retirement.
A defined
benefit scheme gives a guaranteed annual income for life after retirement,
while a defined contribution pension provides a pot that can be drawn on until
it runs out.
Tice said
he believed Prospect had misunderstood the changes he proposed and that the
move would help the country avoid a slide into bankruptcy on the back of huge
unfunded pension liabilities, which he said ran into trillions.
“It has
increased in the last 20 years from £750m to somewhere between £1.5tn and
£2.5tn,” he said.
“The
liability is growing and it’s off balance sheet. It’s one of the reasons that
the Office for Budget Responsibility’s numbers over the next 25 years show our
debt-to-GDP under a low productivity scenario rise from 100 to 200%.
“Given we
have got a bit of space in the electoral cycle, let’s have a rational grown-up
debate about this. I want to sit down with the unions and say: Do you want to
be responsible for looking your grandchildren in the eye and saying ‘our union
bankrupted your future’?
“I’m not
saying change the existing terms and conditions. I’m saying for new employees.
There is a massive difference. There is a cashflow impact but that is tiny
compared to the balance sheet liability which is much, much greater.”
Tice said
it was similar to the issue of funding the triple lock on state pensions, which
Reform has refused to guarantee would be kept if the party won power.
Prospect
said the current arrangements for pensions were affordable. The union predicts
Reform’s plans would represent a net cost because public-sector defined benefit
schemes are unfunded, and therefore today’s contributions pay for today’s
pensions.
In
defined benefit schemes, employee and employer contributions go straight into
the Treasury pot and register on the balance sheet. Prospect said moving
public-sector pensions to such schemes would mean a loss to the Treasury of all
those current member contributions. Payments today would pay for pensions that
would be ultimately drawn in future, it added.
Mike
Clancy, the general secretary of Prospect, said: “Reform’s plan for
public-sector pension would set off a ticking timebomb in the public finances
that will end up costing taxpayers tens of billions of pounds in the years to
come and blow a gaping hole in their tax promises.
“Attacking
public-sector pensions, while cutting back pay and staff numbers, would only
worsen the current recruitment and retention crisis, and would plunge the
services people rely on into staffing chaos.
“Public
servants are not punchbags for Reform politicians, and their pension pots are
not piggybanks that can be raided. These are the people who all governments
depend on to deliver our services, and Reform would do well to remember that.”
The
Treasury’s independent forecaster, the Office for Budget Responsibility, has
said the “real test of the affordability of these pensions is the likely
trajectory of gross payments over time set against the tax base that will
finance the payments.
“In the
long-term projections in the 2024 fiscal risks and sustainability report, we
estimated that annual payments out of the schemes would fall from 1.9% of GDP
in 2023-24 to 1.4% of GDP in 2073-74.
“This is
based on the assumption that contributions, which are linked to average
earnings, rise more quickly than payments, which are assumed to be uprated by
CPI inflation.
“This
suggests that if these assumptions hold, then these schemes do not pose a
significant fiscal risk in themselves, but they do make up a significant share
of the government’s overall liabilities, which are projected to continue to
rise over the next 50 years.”
Giving a
speech in the City of London on Wednesday evening, Tice said: “We have to have
a grown-up discussion about unfunded defined benefit pension schemes. I don’t
think it’s unreasonable to sit down with the unions and to say: ‘Look, for new
employees, we can do this differently.’
“The
private sector did this 20 to 25 years ago, but if we’re not even prepared to
have that discussion, then we’re just not going to make the progress that we
need to because … it is completely unsustainable.”
Tice also
clarified that it remained Reform policy to abolish inheritance tax, despite
the party leader, Nigel Farage, having cancelled £90bn worth of tax-cut pledges
in a speech earlier this week.
“In order
to keep people here and in order to attract people back into the UK – the
brightest, the best, the most successful entrepreneurs – we’ve got to get rid
of inheritance tax,” Tice said.

Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário