Situation mismanaged, in my view. There can't be much doubt that something needs to change. Life expectancies, shrinking public sector, etc. A Labour peer produced the report after all. To me, the "within 10 years of retirement" concession ought to have taken care of that part of the argument that talks about moving the goalposts. Why didn't the Government market the changes as follows: We need to make changes. Your already accrued benefits will stand (which has been guaranteed). The occupational pension the state provides you with represents the sale of a financial service. In future, you can continue to purchase your pension from the state, but it will be on different terms. You are not obliged to continue to purchase your occupational pension from the state if you feel you are able to make alternative provision which better meets your needs. (Unlikely) I do feel that the proposed increased contributions ought to have been put on hold at least until cost of living pay rises were re-established. To introduce them in times of a pay freeze represents a pay cut, whichever way you look at it. One thing that hasn't been recognised is the part Gordon Brown has played in this saga. When he opted to tax investment returns of private pension funds he changed the game and effectively undermined the majority of private pension schemes. Small wonder that the attention of the media then turned upon public sector pension provision. The demographics would still have necessitated change, but Brown accelerated that scrutiny. His general economic mismanagement further emphasised the need to achieve savings in this costly sphere of public expenditure. When you consider that Blair, for all his faults, avoided major industrial disputes for his ten years in office, it's a pity that the present administration couldn't present a more realistic case along the lines set out above and thereby avoid what must inevitably be a damaging and costly day(s) of action.
Private schemes still get £40 billion in tax reliefs £10 billion going to the richest 1%, similar Private Schemes to Public Sector ones fair just as good,only 11% of workers in the Private Sector contribute to a pensions compared to 95% in th public sector, not one penny of the 3% tax increase for public sector workers is going back to pension schemes to invest ,the Hutton Report didn't mention any increase in contributions because they aren't needed to sustain most public sector pensions. Some public sector pensions do need reform but the majority don't, to lump every one together smacks of a deliberate ploy to create industrial unrest.
100% correct sir!! Its a pity the media do not report these facts instead of relying on Govt handouts and spouting the rhetoric of that pratt Francis Maude. Every answer from Govt spokespeople on the question of PS pensions always starts with " Well of course we are all living longer....". Shame it is always "Unions against the public " given that 1m union members are a sizeable proportion of the public (not to mention the unmentioned proportion of the public who silently support the action). Instead we are bombared with the views of the Govt and business leaders (CBI etc) It is interesting to note Nick Robinsons profile on BBC site doesn't mention the fact he was president of the Young Conservatives at one time.
Well if changes have to be made, which I don't believe to be the case, they should start by reforming or rather cutting MPs pensions first. These are truely "Gold Plated pensions". They could also cut tax relief on the millon £ plus pensions of our "Hard working Bankers and Company Directors". The cuts may have been suggested by a Labour Peer but that doesn't make it right. Don't equate "Labour" with Socialist. The Labour Party hasn't been a Socialist Party since the Late 70s and we have not had a Socialist Govenrment since 1950. The Labour Party has been high jacked by a bunch of career polititions who haven't had done an honest Days work in their life and haven't had a working class upbringing. If the press had to tag their articles with their own salaries they may not be so anti-working class.
