Jump to content

The frozen pensions of Overseas ex-pat pensio


Recommended Posts

For those of us who have been following "The Big Scottish Independence Debate" here is the explanation in full of the issue of why ex pat British pensioners  who live in an Ex -Commonwealth country have never had an uprating nor ever will get one. 

 

The pdf for this article is attached.

 

This is the official British Government pamphlet which, as an in-depth exposition of the initial reasons why this issue came about away back in the 1920's, followed by a "no-change policy of the Westminster autocrats since that time,  based on their openly-admitted reason for  the non-uprating policy being because it would cost too much money, is well-written.

 

It seems to be a simple statement of the facts without political embellishment or attempts to convince the reader of the validity of the British Governments policy which no successive Government of any political stripe  has made any real effort to change .

 

Several court challenges have been made by the International consortium of ex-pat pensioners using several good  reasons why the current negative policy should be abandoned and a summary of these reasons and the Judges' replies are also annotated within this pamphlet. Each judgement rejected these reasons out of hand, more or less stating unequivocally that Governments have the right to adopt any policy they like if it can be proved to be of benefit to the country under their Governance (or them, in essence). Thus confirming that  fairness could never be an issue for their consideration if it conflicted with the reason(s)  they give for rejecting the appeal. 

 

In the first challenge, the presiding Judge in the high Court in London was one who shared chambers  with Cheri Blair who, of course, is the wife of Tony Blair ex Prime MInister of Britain.

Does that tell you something?

 

Subsequent appeals to the International Court of Human Rights at the Hague suffered similarly. The last court case was heard before the Court of Human Rights and was rejected by a majority judgement.

 

In the pamphlet, on pages 18 and 19 as I recall,  you will note that one of the august judges who wrote the final judgment commented that no value could be attributed to the fact that these pensioners had all contributed National Insurance contributions as much as any other  pensioner who subsequently decided to remain in Britain after retirement, because these contributions went into general revenue from which all  pensions are paid. Meaning that there could be no direct link to these National Insurance contributions, thus invalidating a claim from us pensioners to equal payments including subsequent upratings.  

      If that isn't one of the most specious and disingenuous arguments against fair treatment for all pensioners, regardless of where they live, then I have yet to hear it. When I paid N.I. contributions we were not informed that if we ever went to live overseas our fate would be to NOT receive the  upratings given to every other British Pensioner. Yet, had I refused to pay these contributions, I soon would have suffered vicious Government wrath and penalty impositions against me wouldn't I? In short we, the ex pats, were at that time, like all others, forced by co-ercion to pay these contributions.  

      Accordingly it set me thinking..."why would he use such a stupid argument as that if he did not have a very good reason to reject the appeal but couldn't rationally justify rejection otherwise?"

The answer, IMHO,  is as clear as crystal: the first Lordship shared the chambers of the wife of the Prime Minister and subsequent rejections lack credibility and fairness.

 So ...who appoints judges anyway? Answer: Governments!!!!!!    And it is to them that these judges and higher officials owe their positions, power, huge salaries and expense accounts  and so forth and so on. 

 

Therefore you can see what we ex-pat pensioners are up against and we need all fair-minded British Citizens to add their voice to the mounting criticism in Britain against the current Government policy on this matter. If you agree with our sense of injustice please talk to your friends and ask them to contact their M.P. to express their views and urge them to support fair treatment for all pensioners --all 500,000+ of us-- who live in ex-Commonwealth countries.

 

This begs the question : how can we ever win and get justice and  Answer"" it does seems asn01457.pdfs if we can only do that in the court of public opinion and not bet attempting to geta  fairness from the lega profession n.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, but if you have decided to move abroad and are no longer contributing to the economy from which you are claiming a pension, then I don't see why you should expect to benefit from any improvements in said economy beyond the point that you leave.

 

You are effectively removing your money and using it to support a foreign economy, perhaps it is your new home country/economy you should be looking to since they are the ones benefiting from you spending it there.

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, but if you have decided to move abroad and are no longer contributing to the economy from which you are claiming a pension, then I don't see why you should expect to benefit from any improvements in said economy beyond the point that you leave.

 

You are effectively removing your money and using it to support a foreign economy, perhaps it is your new home country/economy you should be looking to since they are the ones benefiting from you spending it there.

However, pensioners in Canada, Australia and NZ, afaik, are not even getting the annual upgrades those of us who have not paid any NI at all, or have only paid a few years of NI get, as a right in the UK, any EU country or in the USA.  Those in Commonwealth countries are entitled to that as well, imo.........or nobody should be getting upgrades if collecting a pension when living outside UK at all. 

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, but if you have decided to move abroad and are no longer contributing to the economy from which you are claiming a pension, then I don't see why you should expect to benefit from any improvements in said economy beyond the point that you leave. You are effectively removing your money and using it to support a foreign economy, perhaps it is your new home country/economy you should be looking to since they are the ones benefiting from you spending it there.

However, pensioners in Canada, Australia and NZ, afaik, are not even getting the annual upgrades those of us who have not paid any NI at all, or have only paid a few years of NI get, as a right in the UK, any EU country or in the USA.  Those in Commonwealth countries are entitled to that as well, imo.........or nobody should be getting upgrades if collecting a pension when living outside UK at all.

 

If only it were so simple or as straightforward as that CaleyD ..... although I am pleased to see it is a subject that you and Mr Bannerman can agree on  :wink:

 

 

I paid taxes and NI for more than 20 years with a single six-month break in all that time when I relocated from a job in London back to Inverness. I also paid into a private employer scheme alongside that for 10 of those years (I dont know if that fund even exists any more in terms of my pension). If I could have "removed" that money from the economy as you so succinctly put it, I would have done so and used it to kick-start the fund for my retirement over here .... Since 2004 I have also been paying taxes and the equivalent of NI (called EI) over here to fund my mandatory government pension, as well as paying into my work pension, and a totally separate private pension (RRSP).

 

Moving funds 10+ years ago and dumping a lump sum into a Canadian account, apart from being both administratively simpler and likely less of a tax minefield when retirement comes, would have made my Canadian nest egg a whole lot larger by the time I retire! However, that money - a not insignificant amount if I were to calculate it - was left in the UK economy and one would assume has been, and continues to, support the economy however minutely. I didnt have the option to remove it and can only hope it was used wisely by the British government to grow year by year into an amount that is both fair and reasonable when it comes to paying me out later in life. When I do receive the fruits of my "investment", then where I live is - or should be - largely irrelevant.

 

I am not looking for something for nothing, I don't want anything I am not entitled to, and to be honest, at this point in time I don't really care what the £ amount is for my UK pension when I retire in 20+ years time. I am focusing on my Canadian private pension (RRSP) to make sure I have enough to live on, everything else is sugar on top. Had i been able to move my contributions when I emigrated I would not feel I was entitled to a single penny but I was not able to do so. Having said that I also don't believe I should get 100% of a UK resident pension because I don't live in the UK and my contributions were "only" for 20 years out of what is typically a 50 year working life ...... but that may be 20 years more than the small minority you see spread all over the tabloids who abuse the benefits system which is another argument that could be made.  

 

HOWEVER, what I do want, and what I know Scarlet has been fighting for for several years in this campaign is a level playing field. 

 

Oddquine is right, certain countries do not get any increase in the base pension but others do ..... If I relocated to Buffalo, New York, just the other side of Niagara Falls, I would get a yearly increase on retirement, if I stay here in Toronto, no increase ...... If I retire back to Inverness after missing payments for 30 years? according to the doc from the UK govt that Scarlet linked to I would get treated as if I had paid NI in the UK for all those years I had paid Canadian 'employment insurance' but moving from UK to Australia, Canada, NZ or South Africa nope, nothing.  

 

Apparently this is all for legal reasons and tied into reciprocal arrangements but it should come as no surprise that the two of the four main countries to have their up-rating frozen are also the top two countries in terms of ex-pat pensioner population ...... and in Canada's case, the barrier to that up-rating (which was to do with the Canadian portion of the pension) no longer exists  :ponder:

 

end of the day ... I will take what I get, if and when I get it, but the playing field now is a bit like this ...... 

soccerhill.jpg

  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

oh I am sure .......... the one thing about politics and politicians whatever the colour of their stripes is that pretty much all of them will steal your wallet with one hand while counting their own money with the other ..... and if they can do it to the weak, the old, or children even better !!!

 

only political leader i ever trusted was Jack Layton of Canada's NDP. but the poor bugger went and died literally days after bringing his party from oblivion to the brink of government. If he had lived, he would have won the next election, and Canada would have trusted him. 

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no large pot of money into which contributions go and get invested/ring-fenced and given back when you retire.  It's the contributions being made today (plus some) that pay for those in receipt of their pension.....i.e. the working population directly support the retired population (in regards state pension).  This is why the pension argument being used by the Better Together campaigners doesn't hold water.

 

For various reasons we can barely afford to look after...and I use that term loosely given the pittance we currently pay in state pension...those resident here who are putting the money they get back into the economy.  Increasing the value of the pension for those overseas only serves to further damage our ability to pay those still at home.

 

In regards to reciprocal agreements....there has to be value in it for both parties. I can only assume that the Canadian Government isn't willing to put enough on the table to make such an agreement worthwhile for the UK....which brings me right back to the point that the issue needs to be taken up with them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no large pot of money into which contributions go and get invested/ring-fenced and given back when you retire.  It's the contributions being made today (plus some) that pay for those in receipt of their pension.....i.e. the working population directly support the retired population (in regards state pension).  This is why the pension argument being used by the Better Together campaigners doesn't hold water.

 

Havent read any pension argument vis-a-vis the independence debate (perhaps I should), and although I do have an opinion on independence I prefer to keep it to myself as I dont live in Scotland at this time. Pensions have always been a pay in arrears arrangement though ... I am sure the 20 years I paid my stamps were used to pay a few of our older citizens as opposed to subsidising White Dee today !!! The bigger problem is that we are all living longer so the pot hasnt shrunk, just more hands in it !

 

 

For various reasons we can barely afford to look after...and I use that term loosely given the pittance we currently pay in state pension...those resident here who are putting the money they get back into the economy.  Increasing the value of the pension for those overseas only serves to further damage our ability to pay those still at home.

 

If this is indeed the case then why does the UK government routinely increase it for ex-pats in certain countries and not others. Do these countries not have inflation too? If its to be frozen then it should be frozen for all ex-pats, if index linked then index linked for all. I would also counter your argument by saying that cutting down on some of the outrageous benefit fraud might have a larger effect than adding a couple of % points to the pension of about 1.2m pensioners once in a while, especially as about 660K are already getting the increase and the other 550K are not ....

 

 

In regards to reciprocal agreements....there has to be value in it for both parties. I can only assume that the Canadian Government isn't willing to put enough on the table to make such an agreement worthwhile for the UK....which brings me right back to the point that the issue needs to be taken up with them.

 

Nahh ... the document pretty much states the reason. Its no real surprise, its cost. Like I said earlier ... I have no qualms if the government wanted to make pensions for ex-pats lower than those of residents but to geographically discriminate against ex-pats is wrong. Although you essentially get 2 pensions (UK pension and Canada Pension) do not be fooled into thinking that either or both are full pensions ... under the new rules I may get about £85 per week from UK based on the amount of time rather than value of my contributions and that figure will never rise regardless of inflation .... but in Canada I will not get a full pension either as I will not have paid into it for the requisite 40 years it takes to get the maximum payout (currently just over $1000 a month) 

 

 

From Page 1 (summary)

The policy of not awarding increases has been followed by successive governments. Essentially, the reason for not uprating retirement pension in these countries is cost and the desire to focus constrained resources on pensioners living in the UK. This policy will continue to apply when the single-tier State Pension is introduced for future pensioners from April 2016.   

 

Page Six

Canadian legislation prevented payment of Canadian old age security pension (COASP) under reciprocal agreements with other countries, ruling out the scope for reciprocity in the export of pensions. Although this legislation was amended in 1977 to allow COASP to be paid outside Canada, UK Ministers at that time decided, in line with the UK’s general policy on frozen pensions, that insufficient resources were available for increasing the rates of UK pension payable in Canada

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The majority of ex pat pensioners live in two countries one of which is Canada. Therefore these two countries have the greatest to lose in terms of income. And picking on these two countries to deny the pension to the expats who live in them serves the purposes of the British Government well because it curtals the extra pensions they would otherwise have to pay out greatly.

The Canadian Government has to step up and pay pensioners on minimal incomes(for whatever reason, including the ex pat one) what is called the GIS -Guaranteed Income Supplement, otherwise these poor people would be out on the street or going to the food bank daily in the downtown Eastside then sleeping in tents or subsidy to these old folks that the Canadian Government wishes to curtail in order to be able to pay OUR old people (more and more retirees are coming onstream each year)a decent pension as time goes on.

Are you aware that we revealed a shocking case of one old fellow in Toronto who was existing on 5 pounds per week from his British pension, presumably because he was not receiving a Canadian pension as well

for reasons of non-qualification probably. Regardless of the reasons, this is a disgusting situation for any old person to have to bear and the only reason that there are not more of them revealed is because many of these older folks have now died. In fact they probably did not know how to do anything about it, illness, alzheimers. etc., having taken their toll and operating daily on reduced abilities it can readily be understood how such a situation can develop if left on their own.

One old pensioner over 90 years old,named Bernard Jackson, had his name appended to the appeal to the Court of human Rights as a litigant along with ,as I recall, 12 others asking for justice and equality. He was a radio operator who stood on the sands of Normandy on D. Day and could easily have died in defence of Great Britain and our allies during the 2nd world war. He came onto the beachhead the day after the invasion so he was very lucky indeed to escape death, unlike others from all Commonwealth countriesYet his pension is now minimal through erosion. Do you agree with that Caley D? This is a very honorable man who put his life on the line to protect your future life, limb and freedom of thought and he alsopaid what was requested of him in terms of his N I contributions when he was in Britain as a worker.

Are you saying that HE does not deserve equality and justice? What possible reason can one advance in this case to substantiate disadvantaging him of his rightful pension now in his golden years when he needs it most.

My pension is not the tops, either from the U K or from Canada, for the reasons eloquently stated by Scotty--neither of us paid contributions for the whole working life in either country so both our pensions are negatively affected and reduced accordingly.But my pension is exactly determined by the total of N I premiums that I paid and nothing else. Don't forget Caley D that inflationary increases in British salaries must be taken into account when reflecting on whether we should get an increase every year. Obviously,then,since British taxpayers are paying uprated taxes as well and have been consistently doing so over the years I presume, your statement that we don't deserve it is not correct.

I think it is clear, also, that you , unlike Scotty, have not read the pamphlet through since you ask questions to which he knows the answers but you don't. The pamphlet is very explicit and I didn't find it very boring or very difficult to read. What it does do is clinically expose the thoughts and actions of successive British Governments who think nothing of spending money like water on frivolous projects without restraint , as all Governments do of course, yet cry Mea Culpa with their hands over their hearts, and eyes lifted to the spiritual ceilings of their very wealthy abodes, whilst deeply regretting that there is no money for pensioners abroad--BUT for those in Germany, Swaziland, France or the USA uprating are just fine and peachy. Self-serving hypocrisy no less.

Sorry , Guys, I have to break off now to scrutinise my bank statement which, increasingly is overdrawn more and more as the months go by a lot quicker now than ever before.

And to Charlie Bannerman --awa and bile yer heid, what do you know about all this anyway?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scotty,  I can only assume that the UK Government see's some "value" in the agreements it has with other countries for provision of an index-linked pension for ex-pats....whether that's financial, political or whatever.  I'm pretty sure they won't be doing so just for the hell of it though and each would have to be looked at individually.

 

As you say, the cost to the UK of index linking benefits for ex-pats in Canada is prohibitive...as it would be to any ex-pat unless the UK has some kind of deal in place to offset and/or counter that cost.

 

People move abroad for all kinds of reasons, but mostly to seek a better life for them and/or their families.  If they fail to do their sums right and/or make proper provision for their old age then I do find it a bit strange that they should then seek to have a country which they no longer reside in provide them with additional benefits.  It's like wanting the best of both worlds!

 

 

Scarlet, If Canada didn't want to take on the burden of looking after ex-pats in their old age then they shouldn't have allowed them to migrate there in the first place.  Like many countries, they welcomed the Brits with open arms because they brought skills and money which they needed in order to develop.  It's Canada who has benefited....so it's Canada who should pay.

 

In regards to your radio operator friend, he absolutely deserves to be looked after.....just the same as everyone else.  I just don't buy the argument that the UK should have to pay for him and everyone else who has ever fought in a war.  You'd think we were the only country to have benefited from winning WWI & WWII the way some people bang on about it and our alleged responsibilities as a result of it.

 

I did have a quick read of the document you linked too, but found nothing in there which changed my view on the matter....quite the opposite in fact.  Put simply, we don't have enough money to look after our own residents as it is, and we're not going to send more money overseas than we have too (unless there's a reciprocal agreement that counters that cost).

 

 

I'd love to live in a world without borders where everyone had everything they needed and were free to wander as they please without any worries as to where the next meal was coming from or if they could afford to heat their house in winter.  I no more want to see a person living out of food banks in Canada than I do in Scotland or any other part of the world.  However, we don't live in a world like that and when you get down to the cold hard truth of the matter...you can hardly expect the UK to increase the pension benefits it sends abroad (with little or nothing coming back in return) whilst our own pensioners are having to do just that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Westminster Government has about 50,000,000 pounds in a reserve savings account to meet future pension issues.Did you know that Caley D?

Have you ever seen any of these politicians running around in anything but really large and swanky carswith 65 bodyguards alongside? Perhaps if they spent their taxpayers' money more carefully then the

bodyguards might be surplus to requirements. Ghandi didn't need such large defensive entourages did he?

And maybe you could cut out a lot of the expenditures which ALSO do not benefit your economy...e.g.the stipend paid to Her Glorious Majesty each year which is very large taking into account that she is probaly one of the wealthiest women in the British Empire, let alone the U.K?

Currently uprating overseas pensions will amount to only 0.5% of the entire British pension budget.Do you want me to repeat that. Why, that's only 100 M.P's moat cleaning bills......?

For Great Britain it's time to cut your cloth accordingly. And then you can find the money to pay out afew more pounds to ex-pat pensioners.

Reciprocity Agreements--your having a laff! If they ever meant anything once, believe me they don't anymore. It's a Public relations stunt and throwing "update" bones to a very small and ever-decreasing (dead)number of pensioner dogs, who are NOT LIVING in one of the 4 countries we have mentioned,costs them peanuts and it's great for the image -- good-hearted,honest injuns in suits. Yes-sirree!

When Scotland gains independence then you can also cut your gas bills especially since they are far,farhigher than anything we have paid recently in Canada, although our gas fluctuates wildly too depending on whether it's morning, afternoon or evening.

Oh! And I spent two years in the RAF also, when I was a youngster, and got paid generously---three pounds, three shillings a week in the last six months of my two year stint, dearies. Does that count for anything?

I mean I saved you from the bad Russians who were always lurking around in their Migs on the German border didn't I----just like they are currently doing in Ukraine? My spies now advise that they dropped their military paratroopers into Ukraine within the last day or so and tried to infiltrate the country over an internal lake as well but were beaten back by the Ukrainian army. Same old, same old...funny how the newscasts over here have not reported this and the fact that oil has been found inside eastern Ukraine and Prime minister Putin is upset since he doesn't want the Americans to come near the border?

Yep, the times are a changing' and pensions still need to be uprated though since we don't have access to the resources he does.......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep, the times are a changing' and pensions still need to be uprated though since we don't have access to the resources he does.......

Scarlet... I'm not actually 100% sure what you mean when you speak about pensions being "uprated" so, in the absence of any knowledge of what the situation actually is, here's what I think might be a fair scenario.

At the point that the ex-pat in waiting emigrates, he/she will have accrued a certain pension entitlement through his/her NIC contributions from the start of his/her employment in the UK through to the point of emigration. That would presumably entitle him/her to a proportional part of the full UK Old Age Pension. I would have thought that it would then be fair if, at each increment UK based pensioners get, ex-pats were to get the same percentage increase on whatever they are due.by way of some kind of index linking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The UK Pension Liability for those currently in receipt of benefits and those in the present workforce who will be due pensions is in excess of £7 Trillion...it makes sense to have a fund to deal with any unforeseen expenses or fluctuations and £50 Million is, in the overall scheme of things, small potatoes.

 

The point you make about politicians is a good one....but if/when the country gets round to bringing them into check and saving money then there's still a lot of work to be done at home before I think we should be looking beyond our own borders.  Am I to assume that the Canadian Government isn't equally loaded with fat cat politicians? Perhaps dealing with the problem at home would result in improved benefits from the country which you chose/choose to live and you wouldn't need to seek enhanced funds from an economy you have long since stopped contributing too?

 

In regards the Queen....Canada pay her more per capita to her than we do in the UK.  Getting ones own house in order before attacking others in that regard might be a good course of action?

 

I'm still not going to be drawn on the military angle...everyone has their own story/reason as to why they should be more deserving than the next person and you can't have any practical system based on such arguments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Charles--if I read you correctly what you are saying is spot on.

 

  I had to wait until I reached retirement age , 65, and then had to send in an Application to the U.K to get the pension--this booklet was 20 pages long. The pension I started to receive was, as you say, based on all previous contributions to the British N I scheme. when I worked in the U. K. just as if I had  never emigrated out of Scotland.

I declare that income in Canada and pay tax to the Canadian Government but not to Britain because there appears to be some kind of agreement between these two Governments which, if bypassed, would result in double taxation being applied. 

 After that, the amount of the first payment in pounds that  I ever received from Britain has never altered upward or downward.

The word "uprating " means  an upward adjustment for each year's inflation to that figure so that, as the years go by, the value, or buying power, of the money can remain at what it was when the first payment was made. The Canadian Government pays all of our pensioners an annual uprating in the case of this Canadian pension plan (the CPP) which kicks in on the January of each year and this is based on their statistics relating to the inflation rate for a selected basket of good during the previous year. Of course when I worked I paid the standard contribution rates for the CPP  just like all other employees in Canada.

 

I also contributed through my work to the OAS (the Old Age Security plan) which in Britain probably is still called the Old Age Pension. So I get two payments from the Canadian Government and I can select how much tax is deducted monthly at source, all of which is adjusted when you submit your annual Income Tax Return. Then you either get a rebate for overdeductions or pay the Government what you still owe them(if anything) by online Bank debit. In the case of the monthly OAS payment to pensioners the Canadian Government uprates the payment every 4 months during the course of the year to offset  the eroding power of inflation. If the inflation rate is nil over any quarter then sometimes the quarterly payment is not increased at all.

 

Hope this clarifies the situation Charles.My apology for being a bit curt with you early on. This is such an ongoing irritant and gets  many needy people so uptight when we discuss it that things can slip out  uncontrolled. 

 

Caley D.;

1.Re the British Pension accumulation fund I do agree with you on the need to set money aside for emergencies in the future. However, the sum required  to right this wrong for us is negligible compared to the total currently saved in that fund.

 

2. Tit for Tat, eh? Nah that's off the topic, The topic we are discussing is the unfair allocation of funds based on where one lives. If I lived in Seattle, Washington ,USA--only 100 miles down the road-- I would get the inflation increase but living in Vancouver I do not ...WHY? Because there are less Americans getting these payments than we Canadians and I have already explained all that.

 

3. Fat cat politicians in Canada? Sure! And we are doing something about that:  This year already we have uncovered several scandals and chucked out 3-4 senators from their highly paid, useless jobs for  making illegal expense claims. We tried to abolish the Senate (like the House of Lords) but we  are informed by the Prime Minister that the Judiciary says we can't do it that easily. M.P's salaries in my opinion are very high compared to the actual value we receivee  from their position and the only way you can get anywhere ,I think, is to keep on and on at your own M.P on this issue and that issue so that you wear them down. Then , you vote against them at the next General Erection (ours is in 2015) .

 

And I will quit whilst I am ahead. the Queen's  attraction in Canada is NOVELTY. Being associated with the Royal Family since birth for Brits means that you can get to see the flaws of keeping them in the luxury  they are accustomed to and eventi=jua;lly it all goes sour. The Canadian Government goes along since it's good P R. Mind you, the new young couple  are neat and it would be a shame to abuse them or be rude to them wouldn't it? I hope they have a very happy life and  contribute to the welfare and happiness of your island in their future but the love affair with the Royals might turn sour very quickly over here  if the cost of upkeeping them was borne by us in Canada I think.

Cheers

S.P.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have absolutely no knowledge of how pensions to expats living outside the UK are worked out so can't comment on any of whats been said. I do, however, know that the once great pension fund that was held by the country to pay future pensioners has been used and abused to fund illegal wars and an arsenal of weapons that would wipe out the world. I also know that the UK cannot afford to pay pensions to those, like me, who dreampt of retirement at 65. Now I must wait till 67 and there's every chance that over the next ten years that age will change. I also know that, in real terms, the pension paid to those eligible is not worth a half of what it would have been prior to 1979

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alex,

I have to say that I would be very surprised indeed if any politician had had the nerve to dip into any pension fund already set aside for a rainy pension day in the future, just to use the funds in it to fight a war or buy weapons in the way you suggest. However, it may well be that any fixed sum, which formerly may have been set aside  for this purpose on a regular basis, could have been reduced in some way  to find money  .

      The very fact that these same politicians have made the effort to set aside such funds emphasizes, don't you think, how seriously they view the issue of pensions?  If they don't pay the appropriate pensions to their citizens after these citizens have contributed  to them by way of  N.I. contributions then I think there would be riots in the streets. Unfortunately, we have no streets to demonstrate in and so Mr Cameron and his ilk just ignore us  because he can!

      Very recently, in our Province of Quebec, there have been large demonstrations in the streets over a Firemen's pension issue.

And I seem to recall that the current strike of teachers in British Columbia is bogged down over at least one pension issue.

These teachers  have an average salary of about $84,000 per annum (not for rookies of course who must start on a lower level), paid monthly, plus 6 weeks off in the summer and extra days off for this and that. But they have had a simmering, ongoing issue with successive Provincial  governments for years over how much they are rewarded and how hard they have to work( :cry:) They also get  sick days as far as I know..

       They should try being self-employed: Rarely a day off, work even if sick or injured 'cos if you don't work you don't eat, and running a business is not a 9-5 job. e.g How do you get a holiday if you have no one qualified to take over  because your business income is on a knife edge  and there is no one available whom you can trust not to lose you clients  etc.?

e.g. I had one holiday in five years just prior to retirement at age 70 and before that it was at least 12 years without a break.

 

In Canada  the pension age is now being raised in incremental steps from 65 to 66 then 67 very shortly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scarlet, there is no pension pot as you put it. Once upon a time NI contributions were set aside for health, welfare and pensions. Not any more. Its another tax used to run the country.

 

I do have a question for you though. Should a person who has paid twenty years of contributions recieve the same level of state pension as someone who's paid for forty years?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your opening paragraph about the pension pot-- How do you know that Alex?
Are you a member of a Government panel or do you have some kind of inside knowledge about the level of pounds in that investment?

The Canadian Alliance of British Pensioners and others used very astute and high profile lawyers to fight our case through several high Courts and they must have informed our organization that a special fund had been set aside for this purpose in Britain. Otherwise the CABP would not have told us--and there is one thing I will say about our group which is that they are very dedicated, smart and accurate in everything they say because they do not want to allow any slip-ups in our case to be used as an excuse for it to be sidetracked! And the sum, as I recall, was massive.The Government in Westminster may use this as a source of temporary funding for other expenses but, for sure, they will have to return the money back to the fund because if it is identified as pension reserve funds then they will have no option but to do that by law.

Second paragraph--if you have been keeping up, which I now doubt since I have personally explored the several reasons why our demand for equality is fair in the past posts and you don't appear to be listening. But, if you go back and take each point that I have made and give a reasoned reply then I will listen. However I will repeat:-
1.The fact is that we older folks paid in the same level of contributions as any other pensioner who currently lives in any other part of the world. Yet, we get no uprating for inflation as coverage for the devaluation of the purchasing power of that pension which, once commenced, remains at exactly the same amount FOREVER. Everybody else in the world gets it but not us because we stay in an ex-Commonwealth country -- which is an absurd reason to deny us equality.
      In Britain, however, the amount of the pension paid to every retiree is uprated annually, year after year after year, to protect the actual spending value of that pension until the death of the pensioner. This policy eventually reduces the spending power VALUE of the ex pat's pensions to nil, meaning that the NI contributions we paid into the British Exchequer for all the years of our work in the U K is rendered useless to us since we then virtually get nothing of value back in exchange. Yet the people in power in Westminster still pay uprates to every person who is not living in one of the 4 Ex Commonwealth countries. What's fair about that? The only reason they do that is because the ex-Commonwealth countries have by far the most number of ex-pats which means that the Government does not want to pay out more than a very small amount by way of of pension payments and deliberately excludes those in these 4 countries to allow that to happen. It's all in the "White Paper Bulletin".      What's fair about that?

2. But, that being the case, does the British Westminster Government offer to pay back to us some of the contributions that we paid in the past to qualify for the pension, in recompense for the annual reductions in value of our pension from the moment we retire. NO!!  What's fair about that?
They used our money at it's top value in terms of spending power as soon as they got it from us over the many years of work we put into the U.K., but we are the only group of people in the world who are excluded from receiving reciprocal value payments by way of the pension amounts we get. What's fair about that?

To put it bluntly it's downright fraud. There is nothing fair about it at all--it's all about power  and money and greed and votes and nothing else. British Justice and fairness? When did that EVER matter to any former or current British Government? It's all a convenient self-serving hoax. 

Watch what happens AFTER the  devolution vote, regardless of who wins. There's trouble ahead...Remember, money corrupts.

 

You don't want to discuss the National Service I put in, Alex? Why not? What about the fact that I lost two years earnings and work experience, most of it in Germany which I have never visited since but in which country I would by now be getting an uprated pension if I lived there.        What is that worth? A valueless pension...sure...why not? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a case of generations past being mis-informed about the source of pension payments, people like me who pay into the system now through NI are funding the pensions dished out on a weekly basis, the money doesnt come from a secret bank account worth multiple trillions sitting in a vault under Westminister.  Despite what you were told your whole life, you were never paying into a savings account, NI was never a private pension.

 

The people currently entering retirement age and those close to it will go down in history as the laziest generation in history once the books are finally written.  The absolute rott the baby boomers have accepted from government and ease they were conditioned into apathy has led us to the pension problem aswell as countless others (housing prices, reliance on the financial sector to fund the country, lowering education standards etc all coming from a period in history the baby boomers ran the show).   State handouts are considered an entitlement by these people regardless if the money is printed out of thin air or not, with not one consideration ever given to the fact they en-masse never took the chance themselves, while working, to look deeper into their own finances and how they could improve their lot in life independently. 

 

I am allowed an opinion on this by virtue of me being one of the people funding the welfare system today, who will likely never see a state pension for myself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CH2-- I never said any of the things you said; especially that there are trillions--I said millions.  Merely that there IS a very large reserve pension fund in Westminster. What funds or financial vehicles the money related to that pension reserve fund is invested in is not known either to me, you or the gatepost.

 This has nothing to do with  paying out pensions in the U K since we all think we  know that, whatever it is called, National Insurance, etc.  is used for paying anything the Government needs it for. Otherwise there would be a yearly public accounting for all the money that is spent which would embarrass the heck out of all the smooth tongued Saints in Westminster.

 

Your views in the 2nd paragraph  are interesting since they do, IMHO, mirror what is happening here in our part of the world. Old values of thrift, hard work and only reasonable reward compared to the very wealthy are fading away to be replaced  by a growing sense of entitlement by the minute in all sectors of society. Teachers want less work, smaller classrooms and are not happy with their lot of $84,000 (about  50,000 pounds roughly) per annum, plus sick days, weeks and weeks of holidays  etc, etc,.

They are currently on strike en masse in British Columbia  and want a large "signing bonus" to finally go back to work? 

And here was I , pooe me, thinking thatb teaching was an avocation not just a vacation?Precious few appear to be motivated enough to want to do things with the kids after school hours and the computer for sure will replace the physical work for the teachers  of checking on homework and such. Everywhere trades expect to be paid huge sums of money for often inferior work and pride in their work is diminishing. Value for money is now, IMHPO, a myth.

I had a visit from a roofer the other day who wanted $400 for a job that took only half an hour plus travel of say, a ten minutes. I finally managed to get it done for $150 plus taxes which was much closer to  my estimate of the job's worth. And so on.

 

All I can see ahead is that the British DSS pension for us Ex- Commonwealth pensioners will ultimately have NO  spending value at all-- which SURELY is the very antithesis of what it originally was intended to do for people who no longer are able to work for  a living.

At what age does the Government want us to die in order to relieve them of the responsibility of paying us an agreed upon amount of money designed to provide the bare essentials of life? Can they please state this in the non-contract that we HAD to agree to by way of our regular payments of N I contributions when we all thought that it was an agreement for our future benefit?

 

Therefore, the offered contract of a pension with value to stave off poverty in the future for all State pensioners in return for our faithful and regular annual N. I. contributions of long ago, will have been cynically violated by a Government which cares nothing for us as we age and especially if we dare to exercise our freedom of choice of where we live.

Those who have stated on here that all pensioners should be treated equally, regardless of where they live, are correct in their thinking. If the British Government does not want to pay us in Canada then those in Germany and the Unites State should suffer the same fate otherwise that's not right.

 

That's why we should all  look after our own future retirement plans to avoid the inevitable disappointment of relying on capricious   and changing Governments' actions. Plans opting out of the welfare state type of arrangements would be a top priority for me now in view of my hurt and disillusionment with Westminster's current  frozen pension policy. Rememebr you don;y=t know where you are foing to mend upo ont his planet sso you had better rely on your own efforts and not the Givernmemnt. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Congratulations to the Baby Boomers on winning the Scottish Referendum for the UK.

Last generation to get free education, the generation who took advantage of Thatchers right to buy and allowed her to destroy the working class politically ( thanks pieanbovril) and the generation who not only allowed the UK to sleepwalk into trillions of debt with no social gain but now the generation that has sealed Scotlands fate.

Thanks, you lazy apathetic selfish ********

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Congratulations to the Baby Boomers on winning the Scottish Referendum for the UK.

Last generation to get free education, the generation who took advantage of Thatchers right to buy and allowed her to destroy the working class politically ( thanks pieanbovril) and the generation who not only allowed the UK to sleepwalk into trillions of debt with no social gain but now the generation that has sealed Scotlands fate.

Thanks, you lazy apathetic selfish ********

 

And what wondrous generation are you clacher_holiday2 ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know, Culduthel, that's a very good question!

 

And one I aked CH2 a few posts ago to reveal . But, he doesn't want to place his age on his profile.  Anonymous and sarcastic  comments are easy to post when you are  able to conceal your identity. The negativity revealed disturbs me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CH2--you are on the wrong thread---  the forum  for you to spout your bilious attacks is probably the Scottish Independence one.

 

But Culduthel is right to ask what age you are  because I have also, in the past, suggested that you post your age on your profile but you refuse to do so. Probably because you feel that being more anonymous will allow you to continue to avoid the responsibility for  negative and unwholesome comments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. : Terms of Use : Guidelines : Privacy Policy