BRITISH STATE PENSION (inc frozen) SHAME.
A DISCRIMINATION OF DISGRACE
PPiI (Pension Parity in Indonesia, the AsiaPacific and the world).was born in 2011-12,
With the intent of being the group you can trust. Its agenda was designed to remind us all,
what that agenda was all about, and to work accuratly to that agenda.
parity-warrior,com has done well in the past. the last editor RIAN B did a fantastic job and we say thanks for all his efforts.
Any help from you on one.com web sites, "how to" etc will always be very welcome- - (PLEASE!)
NEWS Liz Kendall Ministerial role. Parliamentary Under Secretary State (Minister for Pensions)
MP for Wycombe, Emma Reynolds, has been appointed as Pensions Minister
AS A MEMBER WHERE DO YOU THINK WE SHOULD BE HEADING NOW?
With a change of government it will be necessary to change how and what to write .
(remember you have the absolute power!
Dont be soft! YOU ARE the boss! added 12 July '24
Obviously the Frozen Pension WHIM will still be near the top of the list.
SO WHAT ARE OUR PRIORITIES?
PUTTING THE GOV'T IN THEIR PLACE? - -
(BELOW US that is!)
*******************
Who is Keir Starmer?
According to a press comment he was A former, well-respected human rights lawyer who then served as Britain’s most senior prosecutor, Starmer came into politics late in life. He became a Labour MP in 2015 and less than five years later was the party’s leader. ( Does sound as though he might just be a bit more accomidating towards the campaigning issues, in spite of being a politicia.- - of course with careful handling?).
********************
FROM THE 1946 (NIS ACT) TO NOW.ON THE FP ISSUE. (78 YEARS!),
NOT ONE CAMPAIGNING GROUP HAS PRESSURED THE GOV'T
TO MAKE ANY CHANGES TO THAT WHIM WHAT SO EVER!
owever WASPI + have (almost) got there first.(perhaps they could help lead us!) added july '24.
The ombudsman is part and parcel of the gov't and yet "the gov't" is dictatorially failing to take actions recommended by the ombudsman!
********************
I HAVE EXTRATED THE DEFINITION OF DEMOCRACY FROM
:- https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/democracy.
1a) GOVERMENT BY THE PEOPLE -ESPECIALLY : RULE OF THE MAJORITY!.
1b) a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections.
The vital words are:- the supreme power is vested in the people.
(Look through many definitions and those words are common.
Strangly though it seems the "people" dont seem to understand that).
Or, more likely, the OUT GOING gov't AND A CERTAIN CHANCE THE PREVIOUS 4 OR 5 GOV'TS HAVE CONVINCED THE PEOPLE THAT THEY, (THE PARTY) ARE REALY THE ONES WITH THE SUPEREME POWER!
((A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO IN THE SHOPPING MALL WE DECIDED TO HAVE LUNCH. LOOKING THROUGH THE WINDOW OF A CAFE I SAW SOMEWHERE AROUND 20 PEOPLE HAVING LUNCH. ALL BUT ONE EATING WITH ONE HAND AND THEIR "MOBILS" IN THE OTHER! GUISING THEY WERE NOT WATCHING "POITICS TODAY!". CONVERSATION WITH PARTMERS AGAIN GUISING, "PASS THE TOMATO SAUCE P;EASE!")
IN THE DEFINITION IT REFERS TO:-
"Involving periodically held free elections!"
DO YOU THINK OUR ELECTIONS ARE REALY FREE? who organises choice etc. the party of course!
who fidled the Parliamentry and Governmentnprotocols!
as the press told us:-
THE NEW PM WAS A FORMER, WELL RESPECTED HUMAN RIGHTS LAWYER,
WHO SERVED AS BRITAINS MOST SENIOR PROSECUTOR.
What that means is all campaigners have to be very careful what they say,
and particlaly on their agenda and legislation!!
THERE ARE 500,000 FROZENPENSIONERS LIVING OVERSEAS.
BOB C SET UP A PETITIONN FOR PARITY WORLD-WIDE.
HOW MANY SIGNATURES ON IT? EQUAL TO:
1% OF THE 500,000! YES, JUST ONE%!
THERE ARE ANOTHER 600,000 EXPATS OVERSEAS ---THAT ARE NOT FROZEN!
WHAT WAS THAT ABOUT?
:"EQUALITY, FAIRNESS AND JUSTICE"?
*******
no answers so far!
Rwanda migrant propsals has or will be cancelled i understand from press article and the Rwanda gov't will not retun monies already pai or promised
"
In the next paragraph we can give a short basic idea!
So howcan we improve on that number?
It was suggested "State pension" related groups should be linked
. Not impossible!
The most impoutant requirment is :-
Strong, forceful, support,
from all the groupscampaigning to :-
SAVE, PROTECT, IMPROVE,
THE UK STATE PENSION.
"THE LIBRARY INDEX IS OF GROUPS IS MADE UP OF THOSE GROUPS, WHOSE PRIMARY AGENDA IS TO SAVE, PROTECT AND IMPROVE THE UK STATE PENSION WORLD-WIDE" (it does needs it!)
ONE, ( PROBABLY RATHER FRUSTRATED CAMPAIGNER), ON FACEBOOK, SAID
"I WANT A MILLION SIGNATURES ON MY PETITION! (for parity)"
WHY BE SATISFIED WITH JUST ONE MILLION?
WHY NOT 3, 4, OR MORE MILLION?
YES IT CAN BE DONE! (With not too much extra work!). (So here goes!).
******
"THE LIBRARY OF CAMPAIGNING GROUPS"
1) it is NOT a group as in PPiI or WASPI. it is basically an updateable "list"probaly an excel book.
(two or 3 volunteers to maintain it perhaps. It is not for other issues or chat'.
The librairians just concentrate on collating it and keeping it updated.
2) Each campaigning groups just has to agree to being on the library list, provide the necessery info to go on the list, and are genuinly campaigning for :-
TO SAVE, PROTECT AND IMPROVE THE UK STATE PENSION.
Info required:- probably just official name, known as name, based on location, a contact number, (caution re security), number of members, number of frozen pensioners. (A little bit of jigling for those in more than one group).
3) the agenda for the "SPIUKP" (??) Is:-
to campaign against the gov't Frozen State Pension WHIM and do NOT accept uprating going forward.
The agenda carries 3 recomendations:-
A)The campaignihe groups are primarily campaigning against the Gov'to save, protect and improve our pension, (yes we paid for it!) WE ARE NOT CAMPAIGNING AGAINST EACH OTHER, THEY ARE OUE ALLIES!
B) INFORMATION used in campaigning material must please be based on proven facts, "official" statistics, and legislation.
C) if quoting from Gov't statements, other authorotive bodies, press reports,MP's or Peers official or just random comments. do please provide a hyperlink if possible.
An adition that should be adhered to is as in the equality Act GENDER DISCRIMINAION!
There are many issues within the State Pension besides the FP WHIM.
"THE LIBRARY OF CAMPAIGNING GROUPS" can cover all.(15 to 20 probably!)
PLEASE NOTE:-1) this ws drafted before any info from the new government warmed their bums in their seats. I did not see anything in todays press about it. Only thing was NIS would not increase. (could that be a hint we just might get some good news ??? (16 July press report quoted masive changes coming !PREPARE TO DEMAND FOR CONSULTATION RIGHTS FOR ALL CAMPAIGNERS
3)There are many issues within the State Pension besides the FP WHIM.
15 to 20 or so? Age, back to 65, max as current. Not welfare as WE PAID FOR IT. IT IS NOT A TAX BUT OUR CONTRIUTIONS. IT CANNOT BE A BENRFIT. IT IS AN ENTITLEMENT "A RIGHT!" WE COMPLIED WITH THE CONDITIONS THAT ARE REQUIRED TO BE ENTITLED TO THAT PENSION. PENSION ACT 2014
WHERE YOU LIVE IS NOT ONE!
*******************
THIS AND THE PREVIOUS PARAGRAPHS ARE NOT JUST AIMED AT PPiI MEMBERS,
IT IS FROZEN PENSIONERS, UNFROZEN PENSIONERS AND ALL WORKERS IN THE
"UK THAT WILL BECOME
PENSIONERS HOME OR OVERSES. (30+MILLION OF THEM!)"
*******************
(Accrding to the definition of "democratic" shows that a political unit may have a democratic government within that poitical party. but including whips bullying and other naughties! (but the people AREstill the boss! show them so!!!
*******************
So 12 YEARS AGO initially we asked the ICBP,( self appointed tingods of campaigning against discrimination!
“Can we join your ICBP group please?”
The somewhat blunt answer from ICBP, word for word was:
“No you can’t. There is only a few of you (absolute discrimination?yes?)you andhave not contributed! (UK bigh court stated that cost was
no excuse for discrimiynation. yes?)
"Join CABP or BPiA pay your fees, get a
committee and that group will “look after” you".
(with some sarcasm it look like a good lesson on how to discrininate!)
too few? no money? no join ICBP!
The PPiI members, (all are the "committee") and we do not pay fees).
The members response was:
“It’s OK we will go it on our own!”
(But always willng to listen to, talk to, and work with other groups.)
There are many other indipendant groups around the world also campaigning against the frozen pension WHIM, and other "pension issues"
the ICBP. (international consortim of British Pensioners),
(Is the group with the highest number of frozen membership) made up by Australia and Canada, also in their own way, campaigning against the UK Gov’t's frozen pension whim ??).
For the first few years we did well, but after years of occasionally being ignored we realised, like all campaigners, it was better talking to the brick wall rather than banging your head on it!
*********
The above paragraph is of the events 12 years ago when PPiI arrived. Much water has passed under the bridge since then. The ICBP has made a number of changes over the years for their groups.
(But not all "the smoke" from their early days of dictatorial campaigning has dispersed).
Sadly the world of the "UK State Pension" is not as secure,or honest, as it should be. ( much of the blame for that is from those dictatorial "boss types."
The number of pension related groups has increased considerably, and that in some respect has decreased the chances of Parity for all frozen pensioners and even unfrozen expats.
The groups that have been groups from the earliest days of campaugning are more likely to be a little close lipped, and less coperative than the newer groups.
Times are and will hopefully changing for the better.
. Due to their involvement with the old dictaorial attitude of the big 3, (and a little bit of jealousy over the othr groups?).
(When we talk Pension and pensioners we can think of numbers up to 40+millions.
A lot of people to include in campaging, and so much to do in the pension issues!)
(The ever growing numbers of pension related groups, and now websites, is not going to do much for the issues we campagn for, without groups seriously working together).
TOO MANY GROUPS AND TOO MANY WEB SITES!
MANY WILL AGREE, AND MANY DISAGREE.
SO WHICH IS RIGHT?
(whats that saying about too many cooks?)
**********
WE, all campaigning groups HAVE ONE ENEMY. -- -- THE GOV'T, (Gov't, THE DWP, THE TREASURY, THE DSS AND, THE FACELESS UNKNOWNS?
(Personally I am very cocerned about who are the faceless ones)
(Will it be the party and "others" manipuilting the pre-election B/S we wll be showered with?)
WE ALL HAVE ONE AGENDA -- -- CAMPAIGNING AGAINST THE UK GOV'Ts FROZEN PENSION (WHIM). "and NOT supporting uprating going forward". (This week, proved we were righ in NOT supporting uprating going forward".
**********
In more recent times thoughts regarding the State Pension have spread beyond the frozen pension, to include all the issues of the pension itself. (just look how well WASPI+ are doing!)
THE STATE PENSION HAS MANY ISSUES BEYOND THE FP!!
(COULD BE BETWEEN 15 AND 20 issues!
Such as State Pension Age, consultation, maladministration, welfare status + + + .
***********
FROM THE 1946 (NIS ACT) TO NOW.
ON THE FP ISSUE. (78 YEARS!),
NOT ONE CAMPAIGNING GROUP HAS PRESSURED THE GOV'T
TO MAKE ANY CHANGES TO THAT (WHIM) WHAT SO EVER!
WHILST THE CARSON CASE, (DISCRIMINATION), WAS IN PROGRESS, IN THE E.U. SUPREMCOURT, ONE JUDGE STATED THAT IT WAS NOT AN FP POLICY!
IT WAS AN FP "WHIM"
(I FULLY AGREE WITH HIM!
IN MY COMENTS OR EMAILS AND POSTS I DO USE THE TERM,
"THE FROZEN PENSION WHIM")
***********
ONE, ( PROBABLY RATHER FRUSTRATED CAMPAIGNER), ON FACEBOOK, SAID
I WANT A MILLION SIGNATURES ON MY PETITION! (for parity)
WHY BE SATISFIED WITH JUST ONE MILLION?
WHY NOT 3, 4, OR MORE MILLION?
YES IT CAN BE DONE! (With not to much extr work!)
Over PPiI time of 12 years campaigning, one of the group issues that has always puzzled me, from day one is, why so much negativity?
After some, "historical"digging, (that involved UK FP's in a number of groups). I could only conclude and suggest a "dictaorial approach" from those requiring "service" from campaigners, and rivallry between the service providors is to blame.
I did actually ask on Facebook:-
"Many times I see in commments on Facebook,
"We should work together." united in harmony".
However, how often do they not do so!
(it has happened to me a number times!).
Perhaps not surprising then we are still F - F - F- FROZEN?
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Do also remenber, please,
Groups are volunteers, NOT conscripts! (- ST!)
(Why should I say that you may wonder. A few years after PPiI started I had an email from a "Director" explaining to, this mere campaigner, that;- "we, the directors, consider the fee paying members are the face workers and we the directors are the boses". My response, which, reluctantly, I did not send in the end, might just make you blush!
**********
Please do not get the wrong idea of my intenions in what I say, comment on or suggest! (My ambition is to retire from the dodgy battlefields of the UK State Pension battle ground with a fully ENTITLED FULL PENSION as soon as possible preferably before Christmas this year! (First full pension, "sod Pizza Hut lets get a really decent meal!"
I will still keep digging on the FP Whim and the legislation.
**************
WE HAVE MANY GROUPS -- -- (A TOWER OF BABLE ?).
we all have the same one enemy. The gov't.
we all have the same one agenda. A gov't policy- and/or a WHIM!!
So why not have one master campaigning army made of multple groups working together to produce a winning master group?
(the headlines could then be:-
The campaigning master group defeat the enemy's discrimination! Satisfaction by the groups in that master group! " GROUPS UNITED WARRIORS"
**********
NOTE in a previous draft 23 march we detailed a meeting between Sir R. Gale and the Pariamentary Under- secretary for Works and Pensions, Paul Maynard MP.
We said :-was this going to be :-
"The long awaited light at the end of the tunnel?"
State Pension issues were discussed. No promises and Sir R did warn
"but dont hold your breath".
**********
Well we all know what did happen!
So what do all we campaigners and groups do now?
What ever we plan needs to be stronger than we have ever previosly managed. Bearing in mind the coming election we should be ready for almost anything.
FROM:-Parity, plus all benefits with tripple lock forever.
TO:- All expats frozen, or even no pensions paid overseas!
(Should we follow the French reaction when their PM introduced their pansion increase from 62 to 64!!)
Will we squeak like a mouse or roar like a (French) lion?
************
Restoring democracy for all is just as essental in the UK as it was for Parity. Even more so. An even harder task I would think! Is that asking too much to save us from dictatorship?
************
The main agenda issue here so far is parity for all pensioners world wide, but other issues have been drawn into the issues of campaigning against gov't polocies. (Partial uprating going forward is not parity and partial uprating actually introduces further discrimination because being based on the current pension status of each of the 500,000 FPs there coud be 500,000 different rates to calculate on. (2.5% of a 40£ rate is less than 2.5% of £100 FP rate, a further discrimination. Not acceptable surely ?
Prior to the uprating going foeward there was a suggestion of uprating based on age.
(1st year all over 90 's got uprated to full entitled rate. next year over 80's uprated, 3rd year over 70's or over pension age. it is still discrimination but on guaranteed dates. A bit better than the disgeacful offer that the ICBP will acccept.
The NIS fund is always well over balence requirements.
£ billions every year!
and dont forget its OUR contributions that do that,
WE PAID IN OUR CONTRIIIBUTIONS FROM OUR SALERIES AS DO HE WORKERS OF TODAY AND THE EMPLOYER ALSO PAID AND PAY IN. THE GOVT STOPPED CONTRIBUTING AS SOON AS THE FUND REACHED ITS REQUIRED MINIMUM BALENCE!
(NO THE TAX PAERS DID NOT HAVE TO CONTRIBUTE A PENNY)
ROUGHLY THEN, WHEN WE STRTED WORK WE STARTED PAYING FROM OUR SALERY NIS CONTRIBUTIONS INTO THE SECURED NIS FUND. RETIREES WILL GET THEIR PENSION FRONTHE FUND WE CONTRIBUTED TO. WHEN AFTER AROUND 50 YEARS WE RETIRE AND GET OUR PENSION FROM THE FUND THAT THE WORKERS TODAY ARE CONTRIBUTING INTO. (ALSO EMPLOYEES PAYING INTO THE FUND)
*****************
(AT THAT MEETING, BETWEEN SIR R. AND THE PENSION MINISTER, THE STATE PENSION ISSUES, , WERE DISCUSSED. NO PROMISES WERE MADE! (WELL DO YOU EVER EXPECT MP's PROMISES TO BE FOLLOWED THROUGH?)
THE NEXT STEP WAS FROM MR HUNT, ("LETS IGNORE THE "V. V"S - AGAIN! SO WHAT DID THE FP'S GET?
ONE REPORT SUBTLE ANSWER WAS "A TWO FINGERED GESTURE!"
WHAT WAS MY RESPONSE? HALF OF THE VULNERABLE VICTIMS SYMBOL (v v)!
V
*********
Et Tu Brute !
*******************
Somewhat shocked, having rejected a thought of could this be a pre-election gov't joke, my thoughts qquickly moved on!
**********
(MY APOLOGIES FOR FLOGGING THE FROZEN PENSION SO MUCH AS AN EXAMPLE BUT I WANTED YOU APPRECIATE THE PROBLEMS ALL PENSION ISSUES CAN CREATE AND BE PREPARED TO INCREASE THE PRESSURE ON THE GOV'T ON ALL PENSION ISSUES.)
This must be a call to arms for all 12.4 million pensiones, including frozen and un-frozen expats, 30+ million workers and future workers of the future!
ANOTHER ISSUE WE NEED TO WORK OVERTIME ON.
THIS MUST BE THE TIME FOR:-
ONE ENEMY, ONE AGENDA AND ONE COMBINED FIGHTING ARMY!
TO SAVE, PROTECT AND IMPROVING
OUR PENSIONSTHAT WE CONTRIBTED FOR.
this following paragraph has, in parts, been deleted.
****************
Now I know this is a crazy thought but campaigning against the gov't frozen pension WHIM has not had much success. (well none really!). should we be looking for a sincere political figurehead to have waving our flag? Free from party control and bullying whips might draw more success for our campaining? Each group has its own Fb or other outlet so all could introduce the indipenant MP. figurehead, with a small panel attached to the groups heading page? (agreed small photo MP indipendant (state pension rep). that in itself will be difficult to agree on. So a "no go idea" probably.
Who is Keir Starmer?
According to a press comment he was A former, well-respected human rights lawyer who then served as Britain’s most senior prosecutor, Starmer came into politics late in life. He became a Labour MP in 2015 and less than five years later was the party’s leader. ( Does sound as though he might just be a bit more accomidating towards our campaigning issues. - - of course with careful handling?).
********************
FROM THE 1946 (NIS ACT) TO NOW. ON THE FP ISSUE. (78 YEARS!),
NOT ONE CAMPAIGNING GROUP HAS PRESSURED THE GOV'T
TO MAKE ANY CHANGES TO THAT (WHIM) WHAT SO EVER!
however WASPI + have (almost) got there first.
The ombudsman is part and parcel of the gov't and yet "the gov't" is dictatorially failing to take actions recommended by the ombudsman.
********************
the ICBP. (international consortim of British Pensioners),
(Is the group with the highest number of frozen membership) made up by Australia and Canada, also in their own way, campaigning against the UK Gov’t's frozen pension whim).
There are many other indipendant groups around the world also campaigning against the frozen pension WHIM, and other "pension issues".
So initially we asked the ICBP,
“Can we join your ICBP group please?”
The somewhat blunt answer, word for word was:
“No you can’t. There is only a few of you (absolute discrimination? yes).
And you have not contributed! (UK bigh court had stated that cost was no excuse for discrimiynation. yes)
"Join CABP or BPiA pay your fees, get a
committee and that group will “look after” you".
(with some sarcasm it look like a good lesson on how to discrininate!) too few? no money, no join ICBP!
The PPiI members, (all are the "committee") and we do not pay fees).
The members response was:
“It’s OK we will go it on our own!”
(But always willng to listen to and talk other groups.)
For the first few years we did well, but after years of being mostly ignored we realised, like all campaigners, it was better talking to the brick wall rather than banging your head on it!
*********
The above paragraph is of the events 12 years ago when PPiI arrived. Much water has passed under the bridge since then. The ICBP has made a number of changes over the years for their groups. But not all "the smoke" from their early days of campaigning has dispersed.
Sadly the world of the "UK State Pension" is not as secure as it should be.
The number of pension related groups has increased considerably, and that in some respect has decreased the chances of Parity for all frozen pensioners and even unfrozen expats. The groups that have been groups from the early days of campaugning are more likely to be
less cooperative than the newer groups. Due to their involvement with the old dictaorial attitude of the big 3, and the gov't (and a little bit of jealousy over othr groups).
(When we talk Pension and pensioners we think of numbers up to 40+millions.
A lot of people to include in campaging, and much to do in the pension issues!)
(The ever growing numbers of pension related groups, and now websites, is not going to do much for the issues we campagn for, without groups seriously working together).
TOO MANY GROUPS AND TOO MANY WEB SITES!
MANY WILL AGREE, AND MANY DISAGREE.
SO WHICH IS RIGHT?
(whats that saying about too many cooks?)
**********
WE, all campaigning groups HAVE ONE ENEMY. -- -- THE GOV'T, (Gov't, the DWP, THE TREASURY, THE DSS AND, THE FACELESS UNKNOWNS? (Personally I am very cocerned about who are the faceless ones)
(Will it be the party and "others" manipuilting the pre-election B/S we wll be showered with?).
well we now wait and see what the new lo t can do!
WE HAVE ONE AGENDA -- -- CAMPAIGNING AGAINST THE UK GOV'Ts FROZEN PENSION (WHIM). "and NOT supporting uprating going forward". (This week, proved we were righ in NOT supporting uprating going forward".
**********
In more recent times thoughts regarding the State Pension have spread beyond the frozen pension, to include all the issues of the pension itself. (just look how well WASPI+ are doing!)
THE STATE PENSION HAS MANY ISSUES BEYOND THE FP!!
(COULD BE BETWEEN 15 AND 20 issues!
Such as State Pension Age, consultation, maladministration, welfare status + + + .
***********
FROM THE 1946 (NIS ACT) TO NOW.
ON THE FP ISSUE. (78 YEARS!),
NOT ONE CAMPAIGNING GROUP HAS PRESSURED THE GOV'T
TO MAKE ANY CHANGES TO THAT (WHIM) WHAT SO EVER!
WHILST THE CARSON CASE, (DISCRIMINATION), WAS IN PROGRESS, IN THE E.U. SUPREMCOURT, ONE JUDGE STATED THAT IT WAS NOT AN FP POLICY!
IT WAS AN FP "WHIM"
(I FULLY AGREE WITH HIM!
IN MY COMENTS OR EMAILS AND POSTS I DO USE THE TERM,
"THE FROZEN PENSION WHIM")
***********
ONE, ( PROBABLY RATHER FRUSTRATED CAMPAIGNER), ON FACEBOOK, SAID
I WANT A MILLION SIGNATURES ON MY PETITION! (for parity)
WHY BE SATISFIED WITH JUST ONE MILLION?
WHY NOT 3, 4, OR MORE MILLION?
YES IT CAN BE DONE! (With not to much extr work!)
Over PPiI time of 12 years campaigning, one of the group issues that has always puzzled me, from day one is, why so much negativity?
After some, "historical"digging, (that involved UK FP's in a number of groups). I could only conclude and suggest a "dictaorial approach" from those requiring "service" from campaigners, and rivallry between the service providors is to blame.
I did actually ask on Facebook:-
"Many times I see in commments on Facebook,
"We should work together." united in harmony".
However, how often do they not do so!
(it has happened to me a number times!).
Perhaps not surprising then we are still F - F - F- FROZEN?
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Do also remenber, please,
Groups are volunteers, NOT conscripts! (- ST!)
(Why should I say that you may wonder. A few years after PPiI started I had an email from a "Director" explaining to, this mere campaigner, that;- "we, the directors, consider the fee paying members are the face workers and we the directors are the boses". My response, which, reluctantly, I did not send in the end, might just make you blush!
**********
Please do not get the wrong idea of my intenions in what I say, comment on or suggest! (My ambition is to retire from the dodgy battlefields of the UK State Pension battle ground with a fully ENTITLED FULL PENSION as soon as possible preferably before Christmas this year! (First full pension, "sod Pizza Hut lets get a really decent meal!"
I will still keep digging on the FP Whim and the legislation.
**************
WE HAVE MANY GROUPS -- -- (A TOWER OF BABLE ?).
we all have the same one enemy. The gov't.
we all have the same one agenda. A gov't policy- and/or a WHIM!!
So why not have one master campaigning army made of multple groups working together to produce a winning master group?
(the headlines could then be:-
The campaigning master group defeat the enemy's discrimination! Satisfaction by the groups in that master group! " GROUPS UNITED WARRIORS"
**********
NOTE in a previous draft 23 march we detailed a meeting between Sir R. Gale and the Pariamentary Under- secretary for Works and Pensions, Paul Maynard MP.
We said :-was this going to be :-
"The long awaited light at the end of the tunnel?"
State Pension issues were discussed. No promises and Sir R did warn
"but dont hold your breath".
**********
Well we all know what did happen!
So what do all we campaigners and groups do now?
What ever we plan needs to be stronger than we have ever previosly managed. Bearing in mind the coming election we should be ready for almost anything.
FROM:-Parity, plus all benefits with tripple lock forever.
TO:- All expats frozen, or even no pensions paid overseas!
(Should we follow the French reaction when their PM introduced their pansion increase from 62 to 64!!)
Will we squeak like a mouse or roar like a (French) lion?
************
Restoring democracy for all is just as essental in the UK as it was for Parity. Even more so. An even harder task I would think! Is that asking too much to save us from dictatorship?
************
The main agenda issue here so far is parity for all pensioners world wide, but other issues have been drawn into the issues of campaigning against gov't polocies. (Partial uprating going forward is not parity and partial uprating actually introduces further discrimination because being based on the current pension status of each of the 500,000 FPs there coud be 500,000 different rates to calculate on. (2.5% of a 40£ rate is less than 2.5% of £100 FP rate, a further discrimination. Not acceptable surely ?
Prior to the uprating going foeward there was a suggestion of uprating based on age.
(1st year all over 90 's got uprated to full entitled rate. next year over 80's uprated, 3rd year over 70's or over pension age. it is still discrimination but on guaranteed dates. A bit better than the disgeacful offer that the ICBP will acccept.
The NIS fund is always well over balence requirements.
£ billions every year!
and dont forget its OUR contributions that do that,
WE PAID IN OUR CONTRIIIBUTIONS FROM OUR SALERIES AS DO HE WORKERS OF TODAY AND THE EMPLOYER ALSO PAID AND PAY IN. THE GOVT STOPPED CONTRIBUTING AS SOON AS THE FUND REACHED ITS REQUIRED MINIMUM BALENCE!
(NO THE TAX PAERS DID NOT HAVE TO CONTRIBUTE A PENNY)
ROUGHLY THEN, WHEN WE STRTED WORK WE STARTED PAYING FROM OUR SALERY NIS CONTRIBUTIONS INTO THE SECURED NIS FUND. RETIREES WILL GET THEIR PENSION FRONTHE FUND WE CONTRIBUTED TO. WHEN AFTER AROUND 50 YEARS WE RETIRE AND GET OUR PENSION FROM THE FUND THAT THE WORKERS TODAY ARE CONTRIBUTING INTO. (ALSO EMPLOYEES PAYING INTO THE FUND)
*****************
(AT THAT MEETING, BETWEEN SIR R. AND THE PENSION MINISTER, THE STATE PENSION ISSUES, , WERE DISCUSSED. NO PROMISES WERE MADE! (WELL DO YOU EVER EXPECT MP's PROMISES TO BE FOLLOWED THROUGH?)
THE NEXT STEP WAS FROM MR HUNT, ("LETS IGNORE THE "V. V"S - AGAIN! SO WHAT DID THE FP'S GET?
ONE REPORT SUBTLE ANSWER WAS "A TWO FINGERED GESTURE!"
WHAT WAS MY RESPONSE? HALF OF THE VULNERABLE VICTIMS SYMBOL (v v)!
V
*********
Et Tu Brute !
*******************
Somewhat shocked, having rejected a thought of could this be a pre-election gov't joke, my thoughts moved on.
**********
(MY APOLOGIES FOR FLOGGING THE FROZEN PENSION SO MUCH AS AN EXAMPLE BUT I WANTED YOU APPRECIATE THE PROBLEMS ALL PENSION ISSUES CAN CREATE AND BE PREPARED TO INCREASE THE PRESSURE ON THE GOV'T ON ALL PENSION ISSUES.)
This must be a call to arms for all 12.4 million pensiones, including frozen and un-frozen expats, 30+ million workers and future workers of the future!
ANOTHER ISSUE WE NEED TO WORK OVERTIME ON.
THIS MUST BE THE TIME FOR:-
ONE ENEMY, ONE AGENDA AND ONE COMBINED FIGHTING ARMY!
TO SAVE, PROTECT AND IMPROVING
OUR PENSIONSTHAT WE CONTRIBTED FOR.
(Last year, or the year before, I think Sir R, might had mentioned giving up poliitics!
(I had a wicked thought! Lets all email him saying dont give up politics Sir R, Just give up the Party and become Sir R. Gale. MP, the indipedent, SAVE PROTECT AND IMPROVETHE STATE PENSION PARTY!!).
****************
Now I know this is a crazy thought but campaigning against the gov't frozen pension WHIM has not had much success. (well none really!). should we be looking for a political figurehead to have waving our flag? Sir R as a truly complete indipenant MP. free frm party control and bullying whips might draw more success for our campaining? Each group has its own Fb or other outlet so all could introduce the indipenant MP. figurehead, with a small panel attached to the groups heading page? (agreed small photo MP indipendant (state pension rep). that in itself will be difficult to adree on. So a "no go idea" probably.
House of Commons Select Committee Report (1997) Third Report (January 1997) of the House of Commons Social Security Committee (Up-rating of State Retirement Pensions Payable to People Resident Abroad; HC Paper 143) | Proposal: “There should be a complete change of policy. We should revert to the system which all the other equivalent countries who have similar schemes operate, that everyone is treated even-handedly.” The Parliamentary Secretary of State formally undertook to look carefully at any proposals from this committee. Mr Heald studied the evidence given … by expatriate organisations and stated: “what is being argued is a principle, it is one which they are not really prepared to consider compromise on; what is being said is that it is all or nothing, and from our point of view it cannot be all, because of our financial position as a country and because of the history. Given the perennial constraint on public expenditure, it is hard to identify a single compromise which would substantially meet the expatriate pensioners’ case at a reasonable cost.” Committee: “Surely no one would have deliberately designed a policy of paying pensions to people living abroad intending to end up in the position we are in today. We have essentially four groups of overseas countries: The European Economic area where European law requires equal treatment with pensioners living in the UK; other countries where bilateral agreements have been made which provide for uprating; three old Commonwealth countries where bilateral agreements were made before indexation was taken into account; and the rest of the world. While the governments of Australia and Canada have expressed their concerns over the lack of upratings for pensioners, the position of most British pensioners in those countries (and in New Zealand) is protected by their social security systems and the bilateral agreements with the United Kingdom. It is impossible to discern any pattern behind the selection of countries with whom bilateral agreements have been made providing for uprating. It would clearly be impractical to negotiate individual bilateral agreements with each of the countries in the world where people draw British state retirement pensions, and in any case unnecessary; a simple change in British law could enable up-ratings to be paid in any and all overseas countries provided that the political will was there to do so. The allocation of scarce resources and the language of priorities are what politics and government are all about. It is not a question of first reaching a moral judgement about the rights and wrongs of the expatriates’ case, and then deciding whether or not this country can afford to do anything about it. The decision about whether public expenditure on state retirement pensions should be increased in future by paying uprating increases which are not required by law at the moment is a political question which includes, but is not distinct from, the moral question. Ultimately, it must be for the House to decide, and that is our concluding recommendation: That there should be a free vote at prime time to allow Members to express their opinion on the principle of whether the Government should pay up-ratings to some or all of those pensioners living in countries where up-ratings are not paid at present. |
Home Secretary, Jack Straw speaking at St Pauls Cathedral 2 Oct 2000 | “A modern civil society is based on basic values of individual worth and equality of opportunity for all …under the Human Rights Act everyone gets the same basic guarantees from our public services whoever we are and wherever we live.” “Courts do get strong powers to give legislation a meaning that fits with ECHR rights wherever possible. And there is also the power to declare primary legislation incompatible with Convention rights.” (“Human Rights and Personal Responsibility” with regard to the UK’s new Human Rights Act. (2 Oct 2000) |
House of Commons (356 HC Official Report (6th Series) col 628) 13 Nov 2000 | Minister of State, Mr Jeff Rooker: “I have already said I am not prepared to defend the logic of the present situation. It is illogical. There is no consistent pattern. It does not matter whether a country is in the Commonwealth or outside it. We have arrangements with some Commonwealth countries and not with others. Indeed, there are differences among Caribbean countries. This is an historical issue and the situation has existed for years. It would cost some £300 million to change the policy for all concerned.” |
Pensions Bill debate 18 March 2004 | Piara Khabra, MP for Southall: "There is definitely an anomaly in the law because some people are deprived of the right to uprate their pensions while others are not. .... Many ethnic minority pensioners from India, Pakistan and other Commonwealth countries have lived in this country for 40-50 years. They are bitter about the current law which deprives them of the opportunity to uprate their pensions while making it available to people in other countries." |
Pensions Bill debate in Committee 18 March 2004 | Steve Webb, MP: “There are those who have argued that the issue is just making a noise for the rich few who can afford to live in sunny climes and that frankly they can look after themselves. Some of those people are well off – I cannot deny that - but some are not. Some have ceased to be well off because they have been retired for a long time on frozen pensions .We are not talking of feathering the nest of the favoured few, but justice. It is said that they knew what they were doing. Probably some did and some did not. I have met overseas pensioners who say that was far from clear at the time. The purpose of my new clause is the pensions of those who now live abroad should be annually uprated wherever they live.... We are now in an extraordinary situation. British citizens who have paid their national insurance all their life, accrued entitlements to a state pension and committed the misdemeanour, as it were, of moving to Australia, New Zealand, or Canada instead of the United States do not receive an uprated pension. Some of the principal agreements were signed in the 1950s when our culture as regards inflation was different. inflation was so low when the levels could be left for a few years before introducing an ad hoc uprating. The British Government are free riding on the welfare states of countries that British citizens are moving to, we are asking other countries taxpayers to support our pensioners. The composition of the list of countries where one does have uprating and the list of those where one does not is pretty odd, it hard to understand the logic, the entire pattern was arbitrary. There is no logic to it and it is hard to justify the situation we are in. The question relates to cost but sorting out unfairness does have a cost - we are not feathering the nest of the favoured few, but justice. The question is moral rather than legal. The moral claim rests on the fact that we have a contributory pension system .We ask people to make contributions all their life to accrue an entitlement. Why should that accrued entitlement vary according to where they choose to live? That doesn't sit well with the idea of a contributory system. Different Caribbean countries have different rules which seem crazy. The world has moved on and peoples’ lives are more global; people are more likely to work overseas and their parents may want to go to live with them in retirement. Should we penalise those who retire overseas to be with their children or should we say, “You've worked hard and paid hard. It's your pension, take it with our blessing?” |
Comment by Lords Justice Rix, Justice Clarke of Stone-cum-Ebony and Justice Carnwarth | [Regulation 3, part of the “Persons Abroad Regulations”] – “its drafting is lamentable, it lacks clarity and it’s draconian.” |
Dame Joan Bakewell 2005 | “There is another view aside from the niceties of the law: That it is a matter of social justice. People paying insurance contributions in good faith, expected to get the same pension as their contemporaries, wherever they chose to spend their retirement. Geography should have nothing to do with it. Why should the same consequences not follow if they retire to Canada, Australia, and South Africa, and yet apply when they move to, for example, Bermuda, Israel, or Croatia. By what sense of social justice can such discrimination persist? The judgment was narrow enough this week, and the cases in favour of equal treatment are so persuasive that campaigners believe it can’t be long before justice prevails”. (Dame Joan Bakewell following Carson v the UK Government - European Commission Human Rights Court 2005) |
Shadow Secretary of State for Work and Pensions 21 Feb 2008 | Steve Webb: There is a genuine injustice in (selective pension freezing) which the Government has recognised … but has done nothing to address. |
Keynote speech at the Labour Party Annual Conference 2008 | Prime Minister, Gordon Brown: “We will be the rock of stability and fairness upon which people stand. And why do we strive for fairness? We do it because it is in our DNA. We fight hard for fairness, we don’t give in, we never will. Fairness is treating others as we would be treated ourselves. In a fair society the fact that older people are living longer should be a blessing for their families and not a burden. That’s fairness older people deserve and the fairness that every Labour party member will go out and fight for. The fair society, fairness at home, fairness in the world. That’s the new settlement for new times. The mission of our times, the fair society, the cause that drives us!” |
Nick Clegg MP 2 Dec 2009 | I can assure you that Liberal Democrats firmly believe that pensioners should not be penalised for choosing to live abroad in retirement. The party’s long-held commitment to rectify the situation remains steadfast. |
Runnymede Trust 1 December 2011 | Phil Mawhinney: This London-based race relations think tank issued a clarion call to the government to unfreeze overseas pensions. Their independent research within black and ethnic minority communities has shown that many of these people, after being encouraged to move to Britain to help rebuild the country in the decades after the Second World War, are unable to return overseas in their retirement because their pensions will be frozen, and those who do relocate suffer a huge impact on their quality of life after contributing to the British economy for decades. "lt is clearly unfair that the people who were encouraged to rebuild the UK after the Second World War by working for the NHS should risk losing their entitlements if they return to the Caribbean, or elsewhere. The current system of overseas pensions’ uprating is arbitrary with no logic behind a pension being uprated in Jamaica but not Trinidad. We therefore call on the Government to uphold fairness and uprate all overseas UK pensions." |
Canadian Association of British Pensioners 2012 | Sensitive to the political reality of the current severe economic stresses in the UK we have made suggestions for 'easing in' pension parity', if that is what must happen in order for global uprating to be introduced. One example: In the first year, uprate the pensions of those who are 85 and older, as they are the ones most severely hurt by the freezing and many of them contributed mightily to the war effort; the next year, include those over 80; followed by 75+, then 70+, then 65+, and finally the remainder. If that is the only way forward, we are willing to eat the proverbial elephant one bite at a time until all of us receive our due. |
Oxford Economics 2012 | Oxford Economics (OE) study regarding the frozen pension policy showed that every single British pensioner living overseas provides a net saving to the UK Treasury just short of £4000 a year, for a current grand total of more than £2.2-billion in real savings annually. On top of the financial benefits to Britain, they also pointed out the political advantages inherent in removing pension freezing as a barrier to older people moving overseas: pressure on Britain’s chronic shortage of hospital beds would be relieved, facilities for the elderly would be under less stress, and urgently-needed affordable housing units would become available. |
Opinium Research 2012 | A survey among pre-retirees in Britain showed that up to twenty-nine per cent of people in the 45-to-60 age bracket would consider emigrating to a ‘frozen’ country upon retirement providing the Basic State Pension was unfrozen. This translates to a potential additional 40,000-plus pensioners leaving Britain on top of these who leave each year regardless, meaning the government could keep an additional £100-million in its pocket each and every year. |
BPiA Newsletter 16: 2012 Open letter (excerpts) to Steve Webb, Pensions Minister | Many retired pensioners living abroad, now have to seriously consider returning to the UK soon. Some have already made that decision and arrived back in Britain, including Annette Carson, the person who bravely took the Government to the ECHR. Many are unable to continue to exist on rapidly depreciating frozen pension incomes. By returning to the UK they will once again reinstate their full legal entitlements to all those extras that the UK does not have to pay whilst they are domiciled overseas - hospital and medical services, free bus passes, annual power subsidies and all the other social security benefits that will adversely affect a fragile UK economy. This reverse-migration, back to Britain, will eventually cost the UK far more than it would to index our pensions which the Government will then have to index anyway! The bottom line is that the reversal of this policy would save the UK up to £30 billion over the next 15 years. This is borne out by calculations (as you Mr Webb are well aware) from an Oxford Economics survey supplied to H.M. Treasury for their investigation. As this is so economically sound we can only conclude that although this is in the best interest of overseas pensioners and the UK alike, such a time scale seems to be quite beyond the scope of politicians’ thinking. |
House of Lords debate 15 May 2012 | BARONESS (FLOELLA) Benjamin raised concerns over disparity payments of black pensioners living overseas after asking welfare reform minister Lord Freud about state pension payments to people resident in Jamaica and Trinidad and Tobago. The 19,000 people in Jamaica receiving the basic state pension get an average of £82.57 a week. The 1,590 people in Trinidad and Tobago receiving the basic state pension get an average of only £44.02 a week. The disparity is caused by the policy of not uprating the state pension for inflation for recipients living in certain countries. Other Caribbean countries where the state pension is not uprated include Grenada, St Lucia and Dominica. “These figures clearly show how the policy of frozen pensions leads to arbitrary discrimination between pensioners depending on where they choose to live. Many people from the Caribbean have contributed to the United Kingdom, including by serving in the armed forces and helping to rebuild the country after the Second World War,” said director of UK Parliamentary Affairs for the International Consortium of British Pensioners, John Markham. “They paid their National Insurance contributions the same as pensioners residing in the UK and EU and it’s time the government rectified this unfair and immoral policy.” After Baroness Benjamin asked him why the government uprates the state pension for recipients in Jamaica, but not Trinidad and Tobago, Lord Freud answered, “Uprating of state pension only occurs where there is a bilateral social security convention in force with another country. The United Kingdom has operated these conventions since the 1950's and 15 contain reciprocal arrangements allowing for the uprating of state pension, among them Jamaica.” The United Kingdom has not entered into a social security convention with Trinidad and Tobago. Since 1981, it has been the policy of successive Governments not to enter into new reciprocal agreements with other countries covering social security benefits. However, the UK entered into a reciprocal agreement with Barbados in 1992, 11 years after the cut-off date that Lord Freud referred to. |
BPiA Newsletter 17: 2012 | Some Financial Facts about the “Frozen” Pension 1. There are about 560,000 frozen pensioners who have retired abroad from the UK. 89% of these are retired in the 4 major Commonwealth nations. 2. Each pensioner living overseas saves the UK Government about £7000 a year in various health and social costs, which they would receive if still living in Britain. That is a saving to the UK Government of over £3 Billion per annum. 3. The latest cost to the UK to index all frozen pensions is approximately £570 million annually. 4. The Government Actuary’s 2012/13 NI account balance of £38.8 Billion is 2.6 times greater than the actuary’s required prudential balance to meet all future commitments. That is, there is a surplus of £20.7 billion in the NI Fund. |
Freedom of Information Request 595/2013 - 7 February 2013 | Freedom of Information request 595/2013: received 7 February 2013; published 7 March 2013. Information request: Confirmation that reciprocal agreements are not necessary to up-rate pensions in countries where there is no such agreement; i.e. confirm up-rating could be done by domestic legislation. DWP response: Bilateral agreements are not necessary in order for pensions paid outside Great Britain and the EU to be up-rated. There are currently no plans to change the existing longstanding policy of successive governments. |
Financial Times 14 June 2013 | |
Taxpayer’s Alliance 2013 | More than £120 billion was wasted by the Government last year alone – more than enough to wipe out the country’s debt [and that is after paying frozen pensions]. |
Hansard | The new Pensions Bill has been through its Committee stage. Gregg McClymont, a Labour MP, tabled an amendment to Clause 20 of the Bill, which is the clause which actually freezes expat pensions. The quality of the debate that ensued was shockingly poor, with many false statements and misconceptions aired. Sir Peter Bottomleyand Sir Roger Gale, longtime supporters of justice for frozen pensioners, have espoused the cause anew and will be tabling another Amendment to the Bill calling for Clause 20 to be withdrawn in the near future. |
Sir Roger Gale and Sir Peter Bottomley, two senior Conservative backbenchers, say they will table an amendment to the Pensions Bill currently going through Parliament in an attempt to ensure that all British pensioners living abroad receive index-linked increases in their state pension every year. Sir Roger said: "Following a discussion with Peter Bottomley we are agreed that Peter will, with my support, table an amendment to the Pensions Bill. This may or may not prove effective but it is worth a shot. "It's surely time that our overseas pensioners were given a fair deal on pension uprating in those countries where we do not have a reciprocal agreement." Early Day Motion 474 in the House of Commons: That this House notes that Clause 20 of the Pensions Bill is intended to make lawful the continuation of the unintended, purposeless discrimination against those British overseas pensioners, mostly in Commonwealth countries, who are denied the normal increases given to equivalent pensioners at home, in the EU and in most foreign countries; and therefore asks the Government to withdraw Clause 20. |