Sarnia
I suppose this is to soften the blow that the triple lock is going.
Pensions are not a level playing field so £488 will not be the sum being received by all pensioners.
True, but that’s because some got their pension (and the retirement that goes with it) six or seven years before others, and many married women paid a lower contribution. Nobody on the NSP was able to pay SERPS, and there is no possibility of inheriting a spouse’s pension either.
So yes, the two systems are different, but it is by no means true that everyone on the NSP is better off than everyone on the old. Anyone who earned an above average salary when in work will be losing out on the NSP, as it is capped, (so no higher for higher payments) widows and widowers get less on the NSP, and the overall loss of 6-7 years of payments is enormous, too.
If ‘wealthy’ pensioners are wealthy because of occupational pensions, that means they have saved into them, so IMO it would be very wrong to means-test based on that. Apart from the ethics of that, it would further discourage people when it comes to making provision to get above a very low income.
I don’t think that people living only on a SP (without SERPS) should pay tax, but that’s an argument for increasing the tax thresholds for all ages, not for singling out pensioners. I think it should be a minimum of £15000 and not be frozen going forward.
Speaking of widows’ pensions, something has just occurred to me - where is Whiff these days?