Find the answers to many of your expat questions here

View Latest Posts

You're missing out...

As a member you can enjoy exclusive info and offers.


The Uk State Pension Rebranded as a Benefit,

Posted by Clementine-626359 - Created: 3 years ago
0 0
Sorry no image available

10 replies (Showing replies: 1 to 10)

Sorry no image available
Posted by Mickrest - 3 years ago

Politicians only use the word "scroungers" where people are claiming benefits illegally - e.g. claiming unemployment benefit when they are working "on the black". Can you give me one recorded instance when IDS or any other politician has referred generally to all benefit claimants as "scroungers"?. It's any government's job to ensure that benefits go to the right people and we should all be scathing about people who claim benefits that they are not entitled to, because they are taking money which is rightfully ours.

Sorry no image available
Posted by greendoor-434095 - 3 years ago

Gov.UK , state that part of the NI. contributions are for a State Pension, additional State Pension , & New State Pension, not a word about ' Benefit'. But the word ' Benefit 'appears when receiving any notification from Gov. UK So why should it be' Pension' when paying in NI contributions then on retirement be called' Benefit' === devious,

Sorry no image available
Posted by oldminiman-10052272 - 3 years ago

The word benefit is considered as inappropriate for pensions because if IDS using the word "scroungers " in relation to benefit claimants. State pensions are a benefit to all who recieve them but should not be linked to "scroungers" as implied by many politicians. State Pensions paid for over your working life should be regarded as an entitlement and not lumped in with "benefits" as often done by the Government. The use of the word benefit should only be linked to State Pensions paid to non contributors. The word benefit offends many who are entitled to correctly recieve the State Pension because it has been used and linked with the word "scroungers".

Sorry no image available
Posted by Mickrest - 3 years ago

I may have missed something, but I’m very confused as to why “benefit” is such a dirty word when applied to the state pension. Both state pensions and vocational pensions have often been referred to as benefits and successive governments have topped up pensions with benefits to provide a living income for old people.I’m also confused by those posters who demonise the actions of the conservative government, and specifically Ian Duncan Smith, over pension policy. My understanding, correct me if I’m wrong, is that the last 3 governments have been gradually implementing the recommendations of the Turner Report which was published in 2002 by a politically independent committee headed by Lord Turner. The sort of things that the Report recommends are:• The age at which people are eligible for state pension would increase in line with increases in life expectancy• A mandatory vocational pension would be introduced (with contributions from the employee and employer) to ensure that all workers had a vocational pension and would therefore have less reliance on things like “pension credits” and other benefits to boost their income in old age.• Pension/ universal credits would not need to be means tested to the same extent as they are now.• Pensions would increase in line with wages rather than the cost of living.• Etc.Both labour and conservative/ lib dem governments have been striving to implement these recommendations, all of which are designed to combat the problem faced by all governments in all Western European countries – ie. that, as people live longer and longer, a shrinking workforce will need to support an expanding old age population and, financially, it won’t be possible to get a quart out of a pint pot.Currently, half the UK population works and the other half (children, students OAPs etc.) doesn’t. By 2050, it’s projected that 25% of the population will be working and 75% will not. Something had to be done to address this problem and, fair play to the governments we’ve had since 2002, they’ve been trying to prepare for what would have been a disastrous situation if they’d just sat back and done nothing.

Sorry no image available
Posted by geegee42 - 3 years ago

From what I can see it looks like the eventual plan is a guaranteed minimum state pension, regardless of contributions, the plan being that people who have contributed more and expect more out get less, and those who have contributed less get more, it will also be means tested, so if you have a large private pot which takes you above the guaranteed minimum then you will receive nothing from the state. It seems the overall plan is allocate a certain amount of cash for pensioners and when you have received it, its no food no heating no housing no old folks home no health care but death is guaranteed. It's all part of the  conservatives gradual move towards if you can't pay yo can't have it.

Sorry no image available
Posted by Tryval - 3 years ago

Apart from the ones who talk out of their arxe's.

Sorry no image available
Posted by night&day - 3 years ago

Ah yes

but we musn't condemm them outright after all they only lie when they move their lips

Sorry no image available
Posted by TwoBlues-439867 - 3 years ago

My days of trusting any politician are over. They're all in it for their own ends and as another poster has said, people like IDS will try everything to screw whoever they can. While I know that there are conventions which should protect the interests of ex-pats (state pensions etc), that didn't stop the WFA disgrace. My cynicism surrounding politicians has reached the point where i would recommend to anyone, "Imagine the worst-case scenario then you won't be shocked if that happens". Nevertheless, we must protect the rights of MPs to have outrageous pay increases, of Lords to sleep for a few minutes to collect their allowances, to be prepared to support the Foreign Aid budget in order to line the pockets of dubious overseas dictators and so on - the list is long.

Sorry no image available
Posted by DN-434538 - 3 years ago

I am of pensionable age in 2018. I applied for a pension forecast.

I have 30 years contributions contacted out of SERPS I have 10 years full contributions not contracted out.

Under the new state pension scheme I am entitled to 48 pounds a week.I appealed but apparently that is the correct figure although they refuse to show me the workings used to obtain this figure.

I understand that fewer than 30% of pensioners well ever get the full new state pension, the one where the Prime Minister guaranteed a minimum of 155 a week, where all pensioners were to be better off.

Sorry no image available
Posted by burmesecat - 3 years ago

Ian Duncan Smith is probably pushing for the UK to leave the EU so that pensioners living in the EU will be treated as non-EU Brits and our pensions will be frozen.  Imagine the savings that will make for the Govt!  Then if they take our health cover away, even more savings!! IDS must be rubbing his hands together in glee as we speak.