Comments on: Joan Bakewell on Conservative pension proposals http://www.tom-watson.co.uk/2009/10/joan-bakewell-on-conservative-pension-proposals/ The inside track since 2003 Mon, 30 Jan 2012 00:10:08 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Jane Langfield http://www.tom-watson.co.uk/2009/10/joan-bakewell-on-conservative-pension-proposals/comment-page-1/#comment-141729 Jane Langfield Sun, 24 Oct 2010 03:25:59 +0000 http://www.tom-watson.co.uk/?p=3979#comment-141729 We have had the spending review this week and predictably women of my age have been hardest hit. I was born in March 1954. My State Pension Age (SPA) was due to be March 2016 under the already draconian transition arrangements but my pension has now been delayed by two years with less than 7.5 years notice. I will have to wait 6 years longer than some of my near contemporaries who retired at 60 this year and 3 years longer than women just a year older than me who retire at 63 in 2016. It is grossly unjust and all we get from the Coalition is the mantra that the Spending Review is fair. In the male dominated press there is almost no coverage of this injustice. We have had the spending review this week and predictably women of my age have been hardest hit. I was born in March 1954. My State Pension Age (SPA) was due to be March 2016 under the already draconian transition arrangements but my pension has now been delayed by two years with less than 7.5 years notice. I will have to wait 6 years longer than some of my near contemporaries who retired at 60 this year and 3 years longer than women just a year older than me who retire at 63 in 2016. It is grossly unjust and all we get from the Coalition is the mantra that the Spending Review is fair. In the male dominated press there is almost no coverage of this injustice.

]]> By: Linda Nevin http://www.tom-watson.co.uk/2009/10/joan-bakewell-on-conservative-pension-proposals/comment-page-1/#comment-90407 Linda Nevin Sun, 11 Oct 2009 18:48:49 +0000 http://www.tom-watson.co.uk/?p=3979#comment-90407 I am due to reach 60 in 4 years time - so I am being made to wait a further 3 years before I can obtain a state pension at 63 as it is. As I already have paid enough to get a full pension - making me wait a further 3 years is very unjust. Perhaps it is time for the Conservatives to prevent the number of qualifying years being reduced for both men and women to only 30 each. We cannot afford to pay out on this scale. I have voted Conservative all my life but not if this goes through. A very serious vote loser. Myhusband is also 58 and will be made to wait until he is 66. How can anyone made plans for retirement when the goalposts keep chaning so close to retirement. I feel robbed as it is, as most of my friends can get a pension at 60. Very unjust to bring this is and the money raised by penalising this small bracket of people is just a drop in the ocean for the money it will raise. I am due to reach 60 in 4 years time – so I am being made to wait a further 3 years before I can obtain a state pension at 63 as it is.
As I already have paid enough to get a full pension – making me wait a further 3 years is very unjust. Perhaps it is time for the Conservatives to prevent the number of qualifying years being reduced for both men and women to only 30 each. We cannot afford to pay out on this scale.
I have voted Conservative all my life but not if this goes through. A very serious vote loser. Myhusband is also 58 and will be made to wait until he is 66. How can anyone made plans for retirement when the goalposts keep chaning so close to retirement. I feel robbed as it is, as most of my friends can get a pension at 60. Very unjust to bring this is and the money raised by penalising this small bracket of people is just a drop in the ocean for the money it will raise.

]]> By: Harry Deakin http://www.tom-watson.co.uk/2009/10/joan-bakewell-on-conservative-pension-proposals/comment-page-1/#comment-90300 Harry Deakin Sat, 10 Oct 2009 17:19:34 +0000 http://www.tom-watson.co.uk/?p=3979#comment-90300 This is just a "fishing expedition" and the "thin end of the wedge" to see how much they can get away with and what the level of protest will be. Those who have not caused the economic troubles are going to have to pay more .Also doing this at such short notice undermines the whole National Insurance ethos. Seven or eight years (away from retirement at 65) is not long enough to be a reasonable period of notice : it amounts to retrospective change as people in this age group have already paid the agreed amount for a majority of the "qualifying period" : it is similar to a breach of contract and is certainly a serious breach of faith. This is just a “fishing expedition” and the “thin end of the wedge” to see how much they can get away with and what the level of protest will be. Those who have not caused the economic troubles are going to have to pay more .Also doing this at such short notice undermines the whole National Insurance ethos. Seven or eight years (away from retirement at 65) is not long enough to be a reasonable period of notice : it amounts to retrospective change as people in this age group have already paid the agreed amount for a majority of the “qualifying period” : it is similar to a breach of contract and is certainly a serious breach of faith.

]]> By: Richard Keith http://www.tom-watson.co.uk/2009/10/joan-bakewell-on-conservative-pension-proposals/comment-page-1/#comment-89836 Richard Keith Wed, 07 Oct 2009 14:38:24 +0000 http://www.tom-watson.co.uk/?p=3979#comment-89836 My wife, who was born in 1956, has had her state pension moved from 60 to 65 under Labour. The Tory plan now means she cannot take her pension until she is 66. That is grossly unfair and a sure -fire vote looser! My wife, who was born in 1956, has had her state pension moved from 60 to 65 under Labour. The Tory plan now means she cannot take her pension until she is 66. That is grossly unfair and a sure -fire vote looser!

]]> By: Jennifer Lewsey http://www.tom-watson.co.uk/2009/10/joan-bakewell-on-conservative-pension-proposals/comment-page-1/#comment-89827 Jennifer Lewsey Wed, 07 Oct 2009 13:20:01 +0000 http://www.tom-watson.co.uk/?p=3979#comment-89827 I think the proposals are unjust. When I started work and paid my taxes I entered into an agreement that I would recieve a pension when I was 60 years old. The goal posts have now changed considerably. Any changes in length of service should apply to those just starting work when entering int o the agreement. To raise money immediately STOP paying a pension to those who have decided to carry on working past retirement. They should decide, work or recieve a pension. If they take their pension it would then make way for the unemployed, if they decide to work it would save the Government money. I left school, went to college for which my parents paid for and have worked with no break in service to present date, over 36 years, paying taxes. I am now told I am expected to work another 3 years. UNFAIR I think the proposals are unjust. When I started work and paid my taxes I entered into an agreement that I would recieve a pension when I was 60 years old. The goal posts have now changed considerably. Any changes in length of service should apply to those just starting work when entering int o the agreement.

To raise money immediately STOP paying a pension to those who have decided to carry on working past retirement. They should decide, work or recieve a pension. If they take their pension it would then make way for the unemployed, if they decide to work it would save the Government money.

I left school, went to college for which my parents paid for and have worked with no break in service to present date, over 36 years, paying taxes. I am now told I am expected to work another 3 years.

UNFAIR

]]>