Is Ann Widdecombe right about females age of reirement?

I think she’s missing the point and I don’t like her language. I know as a non WASPI woman it’s easy for me to say but it was unfair and untenable to keep the female SPA at 60. It was right to move towards equalisation but it should have been properly notified to everyone with plenty of time to plan, continued as it started moving on a month by month basis and stopped at 65 for both men and women. The execution of the policy has been so crass and unfair that some recompense should be paid.

Well, as long as she finds a way to pay for all the unpaid caring for the elderly, childminding, volunteering work that all these so called retired women do, thus saving the state a fortune.

In some respects she is correct.
There will be some instances where there will be some in retirement longer than employment. The issue is that although on the whole we are living quite a few years longer there has not been any recognition of the probable changes to employment to acknowledge that although we have longevity, our bodies and minds do deteriorate. There are few lighter working opportunities for those of greater age, we cannot expect men in heavy industry to continue at the same level into their 70s etc.
For a number of years governments have tried to make workers more responsible for their own pension provision recognising that there will at some stage be a pensions deficit. Unfortunately for the young, preparing for old age is something that is rarely considered. When I was young I thought 40 was old and I wouldn't have minded dying at that age. Obviously as I attained 40 I realised I was still young, fit and active so am still here though not so young fit and active.
Unless personal pensions become obligatory the only other thing would be to increase taxes for those in employment which would put a greater burden on a reducing sector.
MarthaBeck
How would you resolve this connundrum?

Totally agree with MaryEliza, I never had any intention of retiring at 60, so for me it hasn’t been an issue, but I really think the whole process should have been staggered, my retirement age is now higher than my husbands!

Ah. I see a swipe at the Brexit Party here and one of their candidates.

I disagree with her in part, mainly because I signed a contract when I started work, back in the 1970s, which involved me paying into the pot all my working life, in return for a state pension at 60. I didn't get it at 60. That angers me. I still don't have it - and it is not a benefit either.

However, I think she is realistic that things have to change, and they have, already. WASPI women know this to their cost and hardship.

What must change is the vision for elderly people in the future and the agreement they make regarding a pension when they are older. People are living longer and that is not the Government's fault. We can 'blame' progress in medicine, the treating of diseases, knowledge and a better standard of living" for a population which might get more than it's 'three score years and ten.'

The goal posts have to be moved or the sums re-done to ensure those who live to be ninety in the future do have enough to live on. I imagine pensionable age will keep increasing. In the years to come we will see the effect that has on the elderly. Will stress related disease become even more of a killer?

All I know is, I would not have survived these last few years with any sort of decent lifestyle if I hadn't paid into an occupational pension from the day I started work in the 1970s. My state pension didn't materialise when I expected it.

Occupational pensions will come to the fore, but all I know is, not all investments are good ones. There has to be a state guarantee and payment plan of some sort for pensioners of the future. We do have to think about funding.

It does seem to me that the elderly have all of a sudden become the cause of all ills in society. It's OK to bash the old, it would seem. Most of us are still paying taxes.

Ageism is rife when other 'isms' are taboo. It has to stop.

Day6 you did not sign a contract and NI doesn’t work that way. The only proper pension contracts are occupational ones which is why when they change their rules the changes only apply from the date of the change and previous accrued pension is credited under the old rules .

The retirement age has to change. But the whole policy could have been implemented more fairly!!

Day6 you did not sign a contract and NI doesn’t work that way.

Not LITERALLY Maryeliza. <eye roll>

I think things have to change as we are all living longer but it’s totally unfair to change things that had been promised.

As Day6 says if you were promised a pension at 60 you should in all good conscience expect and have what was promised to you.

Changes have to be fair and this should have been brought in without breaking promises.

Anne widdi has basically sat on her arse as an MP for years in a pretty stress free cosseted world.,she doesn’t know what grafting is. In my view it’s crazy to expect people with real jobs like teachers or police officers to work past 60.

That was 'the deal' when my pension would be paid. That was my expectation, and millions of women like me were left high and dry late in their lives, without funds to support themselves. I returned to work to make ends meet, having to plead with my GP to declare I was fit to work, otherwise I wouldn't have been able to pay bills and would have relied on hand-outs from family. It was desperate. In our case, lack of notification was to blame - which was unfair and unjust.

The ptb will have realised they cannot spring shocks like that any longer. Pensioners of the future will be given the appropriate warning notice of later payments.

I'd like my children to inherit all I have worked for, if only to give them a slight cushion in old age - should they get there. I pity our children having to work until they are 70. It will be the case before long I imagine.

Benefit systems change all the time - SP cannot be immune from that. Surely the issue is not the changes but the implementation process - especially when it was speeded up and a cliff edge occurred for some women.

How are the younger generation going to be able to get jobs and pay into a pension while people over 65 remain working?

She's 71, time she retired.

Well said Wobbles. I've known 2 or 3 people who've died of late within either less than a year or two of " late " retirement. Late retirement sucks ! As do politicians.
I'm so against it for one of the reasons that you've mentioned, about giving the youngsters a chance. They haven't got a hope in Hell of a job let alone buying a house.

You only have to look at the House of Lords to see how a life of privilege allows you to live so long. How lovely for them.

Not so for teachers, police officers, builders, nurses etc.

Here here Ilovecheese!
Excellent point mycatisahacker
When they change the rules no thought is given to ordinary workers who have been making plans according to the rules they paid into. Wear and tear affects individuals differently and if it wasn't for being frugal and the silent and more vocal volunteers out there, well, don't get me started!

I agree with you maryeliza the increased age for provision of the SP for women needed to be addressed but it should (could) have been introduced in a measured way. I’m pretty certain Nick Clegg (damn him) in the coalition hastened these changes by a full 10 years at a swipe. It was meant to be phased in more gradually to give women chance to plan for it.

It did start off in a measured way Urm it was the Coalition that destroyed that. However there is still the issue of how women were notified. The original legislation was 1995 and the rise to 65 was to be phased in from 2010-2020 so in theory about 15 - 25 years notice of a very gradual change. It was the 2011 changes I believe that were so draconian and with much less notice and upped the age to 67.

Ms Widdicombe needs to see the reality of the Waspi women.My friend was diagnosed with cancer and early dementia when she was 59 .She has had the treatment and is hopeful of a complete recovery from the cancer ,however she is expected now to get a job ..in an area where there are no jobs for older women .Not many for young folk either to be fair ,but no one will take on a woman who is now 62 and has health issues.She's expected to survive on jobseekers allowance and gets part of her rent paid.She's worried sick about money and thats not good for her health.She phones me in tears some nights because she is so stressed .She like me and millions of others believed we would get our pensions at 60.Neither of us have any issue with equalising the gender age gap BUT they made a right old mess of how it was done and they have left many in dire straits .I'll get mine(allegedly) at the end of this year ,she still has 4 years to go neither of us has ever had any communication from the DWP about pensions .

In many income groups, life expectancy is going down, so this idea “we are all living longer” is becoming inaccurate..

I didn’t get personal notification either paddyann. The whole shebang was a stitch up during the austerity measures. Maybe bloody Clegg was trying to outdo Cameron with this wheeze? (thanks maryeliza for your confirmation of how I remember events at the time).

Who knows? Backto60 might just be successful yet in their appeal in the High Court on 6th June.

I just can’t get my head round a) the whole issue of notification b) how the coalition got away with the 2011 changes. But then to be fair, look what else they got away with. Huge numbers of people were shafted and yet DC was returned in 2015. They set us all against each other and whilst we were busy squabbling and blaming each other for our problems, the rich got richer and inequality has never been so great. Look what happens on GN - shrieks of horror at a suggestion that the triple lock may go and yet only about 2/3 posters have shown any concern at all about the freeze on working age benefits since 2015.

I could have retired at 60 but personal circumstances meant I had to continue working till 65. My employers made it as difficult as possible as they could not force me to retire by law. I made the decision that the stress was too great so my health was deteriorating and I chose a few extra years with my DGC rather than a bigger pension. Luckily I had a work based pension (although I had been forced to cash in part of it in the early years of my marriage to make ends meet!) And yes I still pay tax on it.

Luckily I was too old to be one of the WASPI women but I feel so sorry for them and the added stress as a result of how this was managed.

Am I too cynical in believing that this is a form of euthanasia? Being forced to work longer and longer, for both men and women will inevitably lead to a shorter life expectancy. Throw in a failing NHS to help. Of course well paid MPs, Lords, Ladies and Royalty will be exempt, Ms Widdecombe included!

Message deleted by Gransnet. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Also, everyone had a chance to put themselves forward to try to become an MP like Ann Widdecombe did, but I guess they didn't!