Commons Sense

House of Commons · Ministers' Questions

British Coal Staff Superannuation Scheme

Tuesday 6 January 2026 · 1 question

Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.

At a glance

Answered 0 Partly answered 1 Not answered 0

Key points

  • Steve Yemm thanked the Minister for supporting coalfield communities and for the response to his letter regarding the pension scheme.
  • The Minister acknowledged receiving Steve Yemm's letter last month and expressed appreciation for Yemm's leadership on the issue in the House.
  • The Minister is scheduled to meet the trustees of the British Coal staff superannuation scheme on 18 February.

Topics (select to filter)

Questions & Answers

Q1 Steve Yemm Lab Mansfield
Context

The Chancellor announced the transfer of £2.3 billion reserve to members of the British Coal staff superannuation scheme in the autumn Budget 2025, benefiting almost 40,000 former mineworkers and colliery staff.

Question

On behalf of many former mineworkers in my constituency who have had that pension reserve fund returned, I thank the Minister and his colleagues for supporting coalfield communities like mine. He will also be aware of my letter last month asking about the future sharing arrangements for scheme surpluses for both the mineworkers’ pension scheme and the BCSSS. Will he provide some clarity on how the Government intend to proceed to resolve this final outstanding injustice?

Answer from The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero (Chris McDonald)

I thank my hon. Friend for the leadership that he has shown on this issue in the House, and for his letter last month. I can inform him that I am meeting the trustees of the mineworkers’ pension scheme on 4 February and of the British Coal staff superannuation scheme on 18 February. The focus of both those meetings is how we can deal with surplus sharing for the future, and I am keen for it to be resolved as soon as possible.

Partly answered
Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)