WOMEN will be the winners in a blueprint for pension reforms that will mean people having to work longer, save more and pay extra taxes to fund a comfortable retirement, it emerged last night.

The school-leavers of today could have to work until they are 69, people now in their twenties and thirties will have to work till they are 67 or 68 and workers between 40 and 50 could face an extra year before they retire under the Pensions Commission plans.

In return there would be a more generous state pension rising in line with earnings from 2010.

Employers voiced worries over the costs of a new pension savings scheme reccomended by the commission and the Treasury again signalled its concerns over the overall costs. But in a surprise move welcomed by campaigners for women pensioners last night Lord Turner of Ecchinswell proposed that the state pension should be made available to everyone at the age of 75 regardless of contributions.

That means that millions of women who do not at present qualify automatically for a state pension because they have not worked for long enough will get the pension, currently £82, at the age of 75. At some point in the future all women would be entitled to the basic state pension from 65 because entitlement would be based on residence in Britain, not contributions.

The move will particularly help women who have taken long career breaks to bring up children.

It also applies to the 8 per cent of men who do not qualify for a state pension because they have not built up contributions.

Although the Government will take months to respond to the Turner plans, and many of them remain in doubt because of worries over cost, ministers signalled backing last night for the principle of improving women’s pensions.

Internal Cabinet tensions over the report resurfaced with further signs that Gordon Brown believes the overall plans to be unaffordable.

It was being pointed out by Mr Brown’s allies that on Lord Turner’s calculations his main plans would cost £16 billion by 2020, equivalent to 4p on income tax. Lord Turner himself admitted there were “different points of view” with the Treasury over how to proceed.

Apart from his plan for a universal state pension at 75, Lord Turner also proposed special help for women in his second main proposal for a new national pensions savings scheme to boost private pensions.

Under it employers would be required to pay 3 per cent of salary and workers 4 per cent. Lord Turner proposed that women should not be disadvantaged by the scheme if they opt in and out of work for family reasons. Fewer than one in five women currently qualifies for the basic state pension, compared with 92 per cent of men. More than two million women have failed to build up any entitlement to a state pension.

The importance of women voters to Labour makes it likely this proposal will be introduced, despite the high cost.

Yesterday John Hutton,the Work and Pensions Secretary, made clear in his Commons statement that women would be a priority, saying he was aware of the urgency of the pensions crisis for them.

The Equal Opportunities Commission congratulated Lord Turner for “putting the scandal of women’s pensions” at the heart of his report.

Mr Brown will come under increased pressure to drop his reliance on the means-tested approach to pensions but allies of the Chancellor were pointing out last night that on Lord Turner’s own figures his main funding proposals would cost £16 billion by 2020.

But business leaders warned the move to compulsory contributions for the new savings schemes could lead to job losses and wage cuts.

The CBI said it was the “sting in the tail” of the report, warning that compulsory contributions would leave some smaller firms with no option but to “shut up shop”.

The report said the age at which people could collect their state pension should be raised gradually, broadly in line with increases in life expectancy, for instance to 66 by 2030 and 68 by 2050. But it added that the state pension age could be increased at a greater rate than rises in longevity to 69 by 2050 to limit the future cost to taxpayers.

Times Recommends

• Milk: do we need a dairy godmother?
• DIY: the women doing it for themselves
• First double portrait of Princes unveiled