The Sunday Times “sting” against Tim Yeo scares the hell out of me.
Why?
My guess is that the cost to the insurance industry of a cap on the default of workplace pensions is around £1.5 bn for every 0.10% the cap falls below 1% pa.
Tim Yeo listens to an offer of £7,000 for seriously influencing the course of normal Government. You get a lot of those within £1,500.000,000 and there are quite a few £1.5bns before you get to a charge cap of 0.50%.
I am not suggesting that our pensions Minister is listening to lobbyists, nor his immediate advisers. But there must be many MPs who no longer get top-heavy expense claims and rely on a salary considerably below their pre-parliament income. For them, the temptation to take the lobbyist’s shilling must be substantial.
But if the cost to the insurer is so great, is not the benefit to the future pensioner?
Lobbyism sounds innocent enough but is there such a thing as an innocent crime if the lobbying prize is anything up to another £6bn in the insurer’s coffer at the expense of..you guessed it…at the expense of the future pensioner
Related articles
- Tim Yeo denies claims he offered to advise solar energy lobbyists for cash (guardian.co.uk)
- Lobbying row MP Tim Yeo denies ‘coaching’ witness (telegraph.co.uk)
- Lobby row: Energy policy MP Tim Yeo ‘filmed boasting about introducing businessmen to Government’ (telegraph.co.uk)
