UK Government Petition

merlin

merlin

You chose a custom title
Reinstate Pension/Income Letters at Bangkok British Embassy

Signing this is unlikely to make the slightest difference imo, but NOT signing it gives the authorities a gauge with which to measure the insignificance that expats represent and our acceptance of the situation.

Please sign it - humour me!

https://petition.parliament.uk/peti...cflAewFVxm2Xu7-Y0jxGQf0LmxVI3D6ktMPqwQQdTiyok

In addition... The next website: https://endfrozenpensions.org/ is part of an ongoing campaign to escalate State Pension payments frozen at unrealistic levels in most countries for the UK expats who live there. NOTE: Support for this isn't limited to expats or pensioners - anyone can become involved. Emailing UK MPs as suggested might be even less than a flea in their ear, but pressure is pressure, and ignoring the present situation is definitely not going to precipitate changes. Doing nothing is a sure sign of apathetic acceptance of our plight, which could easily become the thin end of the wedge.
 
From the frozen pension web site.
This injustice only affects overseas British pensioners who do not reside in the EU, EEA countries or countries like the USA, Turkey, Israel, Mauritius and the Philippines.

What is with the other countries listed not in the EEA. Why are they included? Always wanted to know that.
 
Rice said:
From the frozen pension web site.
This injustice only affects overseas British pensioners who do not reside in the EU, EEA countries or countries like the USA, Turkey, Israel, Mauritius and the Philippines.

What is with the other countries listed not in the EEA. Why are they included? Always wanted to know that.
Click to expand...

It is because there is a bi-lateral or reciprocal agreement in place between the UK and each of those other countries to protect the social security rights of people moving between the UK and those countries and vice-versa. It applies not only to pensions, but to other benefits too.

Although the UK has social security agreements with Canada and New Zealand, you cannot get a yearly increase in your UK State Pension if you live in either of those countries. It all seems highly irregular when that key phrase "social security RIGHTS" is quoted. In the UK (and those other countries too,) it is a citizen's RIGHT to have a state pension - and a cost of living increase every year. I fail to understand how that RIGHT to the increase can be rescinded when living outside the UK - other than in a country with a reciprocal agreement in place.

Sadly, it's a debate that has been going on in courts for several years, and the outcome has been the same each time: that the cost of living increase is not payable. However, Laws and Agreements have been changed many times across the centuries, predominantly because they have been determined to be unfair by the weight of public opinion in sufficient numbers. Sadly, expats affected here are relatively small in number in comparison with the pension recipients in the UK (and the anticipated cost to the Exchequer of providing the pension increase in this case.

As the second website strives to point out though, the cost to the Exchequer of providing for retirees is not limited to pensions: As we expats live outside the UK, we are outside the scope of the NHS service benefits too for example, thus saving the Exchequer far more than the cost of an annual cost of living increase.

Only by the application of sufficient regular and lucid arguments for a change in the rules can expats ever hope to see change. No-one is simply going to put such changes in place without pressure being applied from us and the public in general.

I posted the https://endfrozenpensions.org/ link on Facebook a few hours ago, together with an appeal for everybody, UK resident or not, retired or working, to draw awareness of the situation and to become involved. I can truthfully say that some UK-based friends have signed up to it and shared it with their friends. None of them are of pensionable age yet. I hope others will soon do the same. There will be no change unless we protest and demand it - ad. inf. if necessary.
 
Merlin said:
Reinstate Pension/Income Letters at Bangkok British Embassy

Signing this is unlikely to make the slightest difference imo, but NOT signing it gives the authorities a gauge with which to measure the insignificance that expats represent and our acceptance of the situation.

Please sign it - humour me!

https://petition.parliament.uk/peti...cflAewFVxm2Xu7-Y0jxGQf0LmxVI3D6ktMPqwQQdTiyok

In addition... The next website: https://endfrozenpensions.org/ is part of an ongoing campaign to escalate State Pension payments frozen at unrealistic levels in most countries for the UK expats who live there. NOTE: Support for this isn't limited to expats or pensioners - anyone can become involved. Emailing UK MPs as suggested might be even less than a flea in their ear, but pressure is pressure, and ignoring the present situation is definitely not going to precipitate changes. Doing nothing is a sure sign of apathetic acceptance of our plight, which could easily become the thin end of the wedge.
Click to expand...

Reinstate Income Letter: Signed yesterday at number 199 - now 282. Common guys, sign the petition.

Frozen Pension: Signed similar previously and signed again.
 
Rice said:
From the frozen pension web site.
This injustice only affects overseas British pensioners who do not reside in the EU, EEA countries or countries like the USA, Turkey, Israel, Mauritius and the Philippines.

What is with the other countries listed not in the EEA. Why are they included? Always wanted to know that.
Click to expand...

The first line says it all .

House of Commons Library

Frozen Overseas Pensions
Published Tuesday, August 7, 2018
Looks at why the UK state pension is not uprated in some overseas countries, the debates on this policy and the recent legal challenge.

Jump to full report >>
The UK State Pension is payable overseas only uprated annually if the individual is resident in an EEA country or one with which the UK has a reciprocal social security agreement requiring this. UK pensioners in other countries – most notably Australia, Canada, New Zealand and South Africa – have their pension frozen i.e. paid at the same rate as it was when they first became entitled, or the date they left the UK if they were already pensioners then.

The policy of not awarding increases in some countries overseas has been followed by successive governments and continued with the introduction of the new State Pension on 6 April 2016. Essentially, the reason is cost and the desire to focus constrained resources on pensioners living in the UK. In March 2018, Pensions Minister, Guy Opperman explained:

The policy on uprating pensions abroad is a long-standing one of successive post-war Governments. UK State Pensions are payable worldwide, however they are up-rated overseas only where there is a legal requirement to do so.

There are two main reasons for not paying annual up-ratings to non-residents. First, up-ratings are based on levels of earnings growth and price inflation in the UK which have no direct relevance where the pensioner is resident overseas. Second, the cost of up-rating state pensions overseas in countries where we do not currently up-rate would increase immediately by over £0.5 billion per year if all pensions in payment were increased to current UK levels. (PQ 131353, 12 March 2018)

The All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on Frozen British Pensions has put the case for “partial uprating” – which means currently frozen pensions would be uprated going forward, from their current rate. It estimated the “upfront cost” of this at £37 million. Non-government sources have estimated the costs at “around £200 million a year by 2020” (HL Deb 24 February 2016 c251).

In some years, an EDM praying against the regulations has provided an opportunity to debate the issue. For example, EDM 1097, led to a debate on 20 April 2017. The Social Security Benefit Uprating Regulations 2018 (SI 2018/332) were laid before Parliament on 8 March 2018.

The policy has been subject to legal challenge. The case was heard by the European Court of Human Rights' Grand Chamber in September 2009 and the Court's judgment of March 2010 was in the UK Government's favour.

Commons Briefing papers SN01457

Authors: Djuna Thurley; Richard Keen

Topic: Pensions


https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN01457
 
My thoughts and support are with you. You are being shit on from a great height. Another group that is fighting for pension rights are the Ghurkas. They have served with the British army since 1815 with great loyalty. They still get nothing.
I am sorry the I cannot sign the petition.
I can only wish you and the Gurkhas every success and the best of luck.
 
Weasel words are so commonly used in attempts to justify wrongs!
"There are two main reasons for not paying annual up-ratings to non-residents. First, up-ratings are based on levels of earnings growth and price inflation in the UK which have no direct relevance where the pensioner is resident overseas. Second, the cost of up-rating state pensions overseas in countries where we do not currently up-rate would increase immediately by over £0.5 billion per year if all pensions in payment were increased to current UK levels. (PQ 131353, 12 March 2018)"

NOTE: That's the cost of bringing up to date all pensions that have been frozen since this farcical cost-cutting exercise started - such as "for example, a pensioner aged 90 who has lived in a ‘frozen country’ for the duration of their retirement will receive a state pension of just £43.60 per week. If they had continued to live in the UK they would be receiving £125.95."

Funny how "over £0.5 billion" sounds so much more impressive than "over £500 million."

Another titbit:

"The All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on Frozen British Pensions has put the case for “partial uprating” – which means currently frozen pensions would be uprated going forward, from their current rate. It estimated the “upfront cost” of this at £37 million*. Non-government sources have estimated the costs at “around £200 million a year by 2020” (HL Deb 24 February 2016 c251)."

£37 million, or even £0.5 billion is truly a drop in the ocean. Compare it to the cost to taxpayers through the NHS of paying for UK doctors' appointments, medicines prescribed, hospital running costs, physiotherapy for outpatients, transportation costs and so on that would be incurred if the 500,000 expats impacted by the pension freeze were all back in the UK

"The amount spent on health services varies between different parts of the UK. Expenditure is highest in Scotland, at £2,160 per person, and lowest in England at £2,057." https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/feb/01/ageing-britain-two-fifths-nhs-budget-spent-over-65s But that's the average cost across all ages. If we could extract the cost for the over 65s alone, the figure rises quite dramatically to just under £4,000 for ages 65-69, between £4,000 and £6,000 for ages 70-79, and between £6,000 and £8,000 for those between 80-89.

The total spent on people age 65 and over in the UK represents 40% of the TOTAL NHS budget! That's 40% of £124.7 BILLION, or some £50 BILLION.

18% of the UK's population is 65 or older. That's just under 12,000,000 people (UK population 66,200,000 in 2017 ) https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopula...s/articles/overviewoftheukpopulation/july2017

Based on those figures, we can calculate that 500,000 of us 65s or older (0.755% of the UK population figure) would (on average) each add £4,167 to the NHS costs if we were living in the UK. That's a total of just under £2.1 BILLION that the UK saves by encouraging us to be expats...

So the UK Treasury would STILL save £1.6 BILLION (£2.1 BILLION minus £500 million) by giving us our pension increases, all backdated!
 
Last edited:
Thanks for your data guys but I still fail to understand what kind of bi-lateral or reciprocal agreement could the UK have with the like of The Philippines. After further research I have finally found out, it is nothing but arbitrary bull shit, and there is no reciprocal benefits of note, just the unfreeze that the UK stuck on some arbitrary list. If somebody comes up with something more substantial please tell.
In my web search's I did see that the freeze was taken to the European Court on a human rights platform. It failed. :oops:
 
I seem to remember reading not too long ago that it (state pension) is now ‘officially’ consider (and advertised as) a BENIFiT , as if we haven’t paid for it!!!!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Ivor the Engine said:
I seem to remember reading not too long ago that it (state pension) is now ‘officially’ consider (and advertised as) a BENIFiT , as if we haven’t paid for it!!!!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...


UK state pension is an entitlement, not a benefit.

If you satisfy the NI contribution requirements you automatically receive the pension - not means tested, not subject to application.


https://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance...e-pension-is-not-a-benefit-says-minister.html
 
Strictly speaking, our own NI contributions (and those of our employers) went to fund the pensions and NHS benefits that were paid out to others at that time. Our payments did not accumulate to provide any benefits for us - those are funded by the NI contributions being paid today. Our pensions entitlements were calculated on the number of qualifying years for which we paid, up to a maximum of 35 years.
 
Rice said:
Thanks for your data guys but I still fail to understand what kind of bi-lateral or reciprocal agreement could the UK have with the like of The Philippines. After further research I have finally found out, it is nothing but arbitrary bull shit, and there is no reciprocal benefits of note, just the unfreeze that the UK stuck on some arbitrary list. If somebody comes up with something more substantial please tell.
In my web search's I did see that the freeze was taken to the European Court on a human rights platform. It failed. :oops:
Click to expand...

"17. The main purpose of reciprocal agreements so far has been to provide a measure of social protection for workers and the immediate members of their families, when moving from one country to another during their working lives. In effect, they generally prevent such workers from having to contribute to both countries’ social security schemes at the same time whilst ensuring they retain benefit cover from either one country or the other. On reaching pensionable age, such workers who have been insured in two or more countries’ schemes can receive a pension from each which reflects the amount of their insurance in each."

http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN01457/SN01457.pdf
 
Merlin said:
Strictly speaking, our own NI contributions (and those of our employers) went to fund the pensions and NHS benefits that were paid out to others at that time. Our payments did not accumulate to provide any benefits for us - those are funded by the NI contributions being paid today. Our pensions entitlements were calculated on the number of qualifying years for which we paid, up to a maximum of 35 years.
Click to expand...


That is obviously a Treasury function and governments are not renowned for stashing away today's money for future payments...... it is not a 'pool' of money available for that particular generation. :grinning:


To get the full basic State Pension you need a total of 30 qualifying years of National Insurance contributions or credits.
 
CO-CO said:
That is obviously a Treasury function and governments are not renowned for stashing away today's money for future payments...... it is not a 'pool' of money available for that particular generation. :grinning:


To get the full basic State Pension you need a total of 30 qualifying years of National Insurance contributions or credits.
Click to expand...

Not quite correct.

Workers needed to have 30 years of qualifying National Insurance contributions to get the old state pension, but require 35 years to get the full flat rate state pension now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top