Suspension of the triple lock

I am one of the WASPI women who have had to work for an extra 6 years and have taken part in two demonstrations in London regarding this.
When I met with my local MP he told me that although we would wait longer the triple lock was the answer to levelling up!
During the last year I could have worked on my zero hours contract, but decided not to, during the worst months of this pandemic, as it would have been dealing with the public daily, in a hospital.
So, existed on savings, until going back in February after receiving the first jab.
I am due to get my state pension later this month.
The dispute around pensioners and pensions is a thorny subject. I do know pensioners who are very wealthy, but as they were in business, generating the economy, creating jobs etc they will say they are just as entitled to the state pensions, cold weather payment and until recently free TV licences, as any one.
And two of them were furious about that when they heard they would have to pay the licence fee.
So, at the top end of society we have the very wealthy receiving it, at the very bottom we have people in poverty, probably living in poorly heated housing with metered heating etc, ( but they should be able to access pensions credit) and then in the middle you have the ones who have always worked, probably taken a break out to bring up children and a few years of that can certainly drop a personal pension down.
My MP talked a lot about how workplace pensions are going to help ease this problem in the future.
And when I pointed out that sometimes this is not always the case especially when you have a situation like British Home Stores.
The workers of that store must indeed feel very let down that Philip Green is still probably enjoying their pension on a yacht in the in the South of France and was never made an example of.

Classic [Sat 10-Jul-21 11:02:54} As your State Pension increases more and more each year by comparison to the old State Pension I do hope these "they cheated us women of six years of the pension we were promised" will stop saying this.

We are all paid low basic State Pensions. However, for each year you claim the new State Pension, you will draw further and further ahead of the old one. We will see fewer and fewer pensioners needing to claim pensioner age benefits in this group. That is where the money has gone.

Why oh why can't we all attack governments that determine this pension, which is low by comparison to most countries of our wealth, and work together to raise it. The triple lock was an aim to raise pension payments. It could just be they are talking about discontinuing this. That will affect those on both the old and new pensions. That is the only argument we need to be having at the moment - not distractions on to areas where we do not always hear the whole truth about what has happened.

Kwest I emailed my MP a few days ago, (google, it’s easy to get the address). Perhaps others might do the same and then, maybe, they may pay attention. Or probably not.

Despite the triple lock introduced by Tony Blair some 20 odd years ago because of the terrible poverty of pensioners at the time, we still have the lowest pension rate in Europe. For a wealthy country such as ours shame on them for even considering getting rid of what was supposed to bring our pensions up to a decent rate. My £134 pw doesn’t go far.

It wasn’t introduced by Tony Blair, it was the Conservative and Lib Dem coalition government that gave us the triple lock,
Which was about 11 years ago.

I know people keep saying we have the lowest pension in Europe. I haven’t checked that. What I would say is, it needs to be looked at in perspective. It needs to be looked at alongside the cost of living. Do these countries with higher pensions have higher cost of living expenses?
I also, firmly believe, the pension, of any type, should NOT be touched. People receiving pensions are extremely unlikely to miraculously find any other, additional, form of income. Their life plans are based on their pensions. How can they have a good and hope filled retirement if the goalposts keep shifting.
When I started working I held two beliefs. One was, at age sixty I would receive my state pension based on the years of contributions. I was saddened that my years of working before the age of eighteen didn’t qualify for anything significant. I was, after all, working full time.
Anyway, my second belief was......I would only receive any other state handout if I was unemployed but I would only receive it until I got a new job. Whilst I grew up in a Council provided house no one around me was on the dole as a way of life.
Pensions must not be touched. Maxwell did this, Green has done this, subsequent governments have done this. It’s theft, they have no right, nor permission to do this.
As to these young journalists/hopeful politicians who keep writing their views on these matters and who, successfully, forget, or choose to ignore history and the truth, they need putting back into their boxes. Do not raise their profile by discussing them, this is what they want. This is how Boris came thru the system. That and the ‘old boys’ network.
That is my opinion....for what it is worth.

I certainly don't want to lose money from any pension increase, having had to wait an extra 6 years for it but I am willing to if it benefits all society not just pouring it into the NHS and Social care. I know we have one of the lowest pensions in Europe but most pay towards their health care we don't. I for one would like to see the housing market sorted and rents capped so people can afford to live or put money by to save for deposits. I would prefer income taxes to be increased and VAT increased on luxury goods and foods to offset the shortfalls.

Classic

Horrified, so they want to remove free bus passes and free prescriptions for those under pension age, and now breaking promises on the pensions, how quickly they have forgotten why the triple lock was introduced. So they cheated us women of six years of the pension we were promised, so many of us having to drop down to min wage type employment as arthritis, and other problems (including attitude and ageism) take hold. The people on min wage and needing prescription because of ill health now get told by the time you retire you might be struggling financially the rest of your life

Free bus passes only come now when you reach state pension age. I applied for mine at age 66 when I got my state pension. They are talking about free prescriptions being removed for those who are 60+ but not yet eligible for state pension. That makes sense to me as people on certain benefits get free prescriptions anyway, as do many people with permanant conditions on certain medication. For many years I had 2 exemption cards for prescriptions, one because of my medication/health condition and the other because I was a low earner on tax credits. Since reaching 60 I no longer had to carry exemption cards. If this change is made the poorest and sickest will still get free prescriptions. The people who lose out most will, as always, be those who earn just above the level required for exemption.

Many years ago my mother was collecting her free prescription when she overheard the customer in front of her ask the chemist which of the prescribed medications was most important as she couldn't afford them all! It upset her as she got hers free despite being able to afford to pay. Whatever the system there will always be winners and losers sadly. That's probably why my mum was so generous in her giving to charities as she was grateful for what she had. She wasn't rich, but had enough to live comfortably and with some to spare. meanwhile my MiL was always quick to point out she was a 'poor pensioner' despite having far more than my mum!

lemongrove

Not being in the ‘I’m alright Jack’ camp, I think the triple lock will have to go, much as I like it.
I would prefer to see those who are managing on the state pension only have that topped up instead.
It isn’t right, when others much younger are struggling moneywise for so many older people to continue getting the triple lock pension when the majority have a private pension as well. The state ‘old age’ pension takes the lion’s share of all the benefits paid out in the UK.

I agree with this. DH and I paid NI contributions for years but there are so many people much worse off than we are, old and young.
I appreciate that there are financial assistance schemes for those whose only income is their state pension but, like all such payments, there is a mountain of paperwork to complete. Perhaps consideration could be given to making this simpler.
My DD has mental health issues and lives on benefit including a disability supplement. Even though we help her financially it is still hard for her to keep her head above water. She regularly has to fill in reams of paperwork to keep her entitlement open and, if any of this is late or goes astray, she can be without any money for up to six weeks.
It must cost a fortune to administer such schemes, whether they are means tested or simply a way of checking your entitlement due to ill-health.
I think that a balance must be found between keeping down the cost of the State Pension (and other support payments) and finding extra money to support those who really need it.

I would feel very guilty to take a substantial increase in my state pension when NHS employees have been offered 1%.

Those pensioners who have adequate or higher incomes will not be too bothered.

What concerns me are those pensioners who are on pension credit or those just above the limit for help. These are people at the bottom of the pension heap.

Inflation of food, energy and council tax costs will make life more difficult. Any increases paid could be recouped via increasing direct taxation (a progressive tax). Any increase in regressive taxes (eg VAT) inevitably hit those with low incomes.

It’s disgraceful that there are so many poor people in this very wealthy country. I’m ashamed of the way those who have treat those at the bottom of the financial heap. We can afford to do far better for more people.

Callistemon

^Ahem! Actually, it's not totally true that Gordon Brown decimated private pensions, but I haven't got the time nor energy at the moment to refute it^.

Decimate- meaning:

To extract a tax of 10% from something.

Abolishing tax relief made a huge difference to many who had money in private funds, some tiny .
It may have been counter-productive as some people may now have to claim benefit as a result.

Yes, it made a huge difference to many of our company and private pensions. 10% less per year into the pot, if you think of it as you would compound interest, will make more than 100% difference over 10 years. Brown did this in the 80's so our pension pots have been reduced by a minimum of 250%, even if we ignore the growth that our investments would have made.

I am so lucky!!! I have recently received an official letter informing me that as I am now 80 I will get an extra 25p per week in my pension!

Not much mention has been made of the fact that better off pensioners are repaying a hefty chunk of their State Pensions back through tax, meaning that they actually keep up to 40% less.

State pension is paid from NI contributions. Currently there are lots of unfilled vacancies in the job market if these were filled more NI contributions would go in the pot and universal credit payments would reduce. Simplistic I know but I think more should be done to get people back to work.
We heard a lot last year about the high numbers of covid deaths in over 65s as this was an unseen event surely the treasury had included these poor souls in their budget projections meaning they are now paying less in pension than expected.

Thanks cc

I began to wonder if I'd dreamt it!

Well it was on the cards. Knew he would consider this. I have four more years to work to get mine but I won’t hold my breath he may have raised the retirement age again by then!

A percentage increase always gives more money to those better off - receiving more pension or higher up the pay scale etc. Maybe it would be fairer to look at the increase in the cost of living - taking all aspects into account - and give everyone the same monetary amount. Everyone pays the same price in any shop they go to so this is maybe a fairer way.

Alegrias1

^There is no pot of money with each persons name on regardless of what NI or Tax they have or are paying. Its been used to pay for our parents and grandparents pensions ...^

MaggsMcG - this needs saying more often!

I really doesn't need saying more often .

It keeps being said, as though we are all too stupid to understand how the system works.

IMO, it really doesn't matter whether there is an actual 'pot'. Unless the original state pension contributions were intended as a 'smash and grab' raid on the wages of the young, then all along everyone has paid in in the belief that in their own turn they would get back, and it is this principle that matters, not the way that the scheme is administered - it has a monopoly after all.

National Insurance was never intended as the state equivalent of someone coming round with a bucket to collect contributions towards the support of those in need - it is a compulsory scheme for everyone who works, and intended to cover all of us for care when we are ill and for support when we are old.

At no point was anyone given the choice to opt out and make their own arrangements, or told that the long-term benefits of their contributions could be withdrawn at any time, or that they may no longer qualify for them if the political climate shifted.

If people had chosen to be part of a ponzi scheme as opposed to a different form of investment, then you could admonish them for expecting to get a return when their turn came, but they didn't - there was only one scheme, and no choice but to contribute to it.

Whitewavemark2

We have the lowest pension in Europe.

Many people - particularly women only have the state pension to live on, hopefully topped up by pension credit etc.

The disregard for the poor is utterly characteristic of this government, and we should hold them to account and never forget their callousness.

Do not let them fool you into the old whiskered excuse that it can’t be afforded - not true. But of course we know that they lie as well.

Absolutely right! If it can’t be afforded, why is Johnson planning a new Prime Minister’s yacht at a cost of £200 million? They could also afford to give millions of pounds worth of contracts to Tory friends with no experience in the required fields, despite existing experienced companies offering to provide the services (e.g. PPE and Ventilators). Their mates then failed to do the job and all that money was wasted, but it did ensure more donations from the mates later.

They can afford what they choose to afford.

They can afford what they choose to afford.
Yes, and they can choose where any cuts that need to be made (if any) should fall. The line that says that increases to pensions have to be made at the expense of the young, (or of the working poor) is a cynical lie, and turns people against one another instead of bringing us together.

GardenofEngland

I certainly don't want to lose money from any pension increase, having had to wait an extra 6 years for it but I am willing to if it benefits all society not just pouring it into the NHS and Social care. I know we have one of the lowest pensions in Europe but most pay towards their health care we don't. I for one would like to see the housing market sorted and rents capped so people can afford to live or put money by to save for deposits. I would prefer income taxes to be increased and VAT increased on luxury goods and foods to offset the shortfalls.

We do pay towards our health care, via taxes, as a retired tax payer, am still doing so. My sister in Germany has to pay compulsory health insurance, rated as to how much you earn. They also have higher pensions, and are still paid wages-when off sick.

Funny how the government can keep on affording their benefits.

The country has enough money to buy a vanity yacht for Johnson! It had enough to pay the party doners for useless Masks and protective equipment! Illions wasted, so poor excuse about triple lock pension!

Once the triple lock is frozen it will never resurface again. The Government keeps finding money for various things and I am sure they could manage to give the pensioners a decent rise and help the the young people struggling to buy house. The problem is they all want to start off in a new house. In the past young couples started off in a "start







The Government finds money for other projects and could easily give the pensioners a decent increase and help young people buy a home. Part of the trouble is the young couples want a new house whereas in the past couples started off in a starter home for a few years while still saving for a better home and use any equity for the next better home.





home"

What we have been through in the past 18 months has cost the country a fortune. Wages have been paid so that people can keep their jobs and businesses supported. I don't mind that my pension won't go up next year. We all have to make some sacrifice