Backbench MHK Alfred Cannan says he is disappointed that a vital debate on public sector pension reform was thwarted by the vote of the unelected upper house.
His call for an emergency debate was supported by 15 votes to eight in the House of Keys but failed to carry as LegCo voted seven to two against.
He had tabled his urgent motion after proposals for the reform of public sector pensions due to be debated in Tynwald this week were withdrawn at the last minute - and deferred until the June sitting to allow members more time to consider the issues.
The move came after Mr Cannan and four other backbench MHKs announced they would not be supporting ‘flawed’ proposals for reform.
These proposals would see staff across the public services paying up to 50 per cent more in pensions contributions for reduced future benefits.
But Mr Cannan, Ralph Peake and John Houghton (Douglas North), Leonard Singer (Ramsey) and Graham Cregeen (Malew and Santon) claimed the plans are flawed and would expose the taxpayer to unacceptable levels of financial risk.
They said the burden on the taxpayer to support the unified pension scheme will rise from the current £44m to more than £100m over the next six years.
Mr Cannan’s emergency motion has sought a series of amendments including that CoMin set up an independent review commission, chaired by a QC, to review options for a fair and sustainable public sector pension scheme.
He told the Manx Independent that he had been led to believe that these amendments would be acceptable to CoMin - only for him to find out on Tuesday morning that the motion for reform was being withdrawn. It was that which led him to table the emergency motion.
Mr Cannan said MLCs had once again ‘blocked the democratic wishes of the elected house, this time for a vital debate on public sector pensions’.
Seven Ministers and Glenfaba MHK Geoff Boot were the only one in the Keys to vote against.
John Shimmin MHK, vice chairman of the Public Sector Pensions Authority, explained why the motion had been withdrawn.
He said: ‘It has become apparent that some members are uncomfortable with government’s proposals. Deferring the matter until June will allow further opportunities for members to clarify their concerns and any additional or alternative approaches they may have.’
