Truth or Spin?

[Daily-Editor]

http://news.sky.com/s...ns%2C_Says_Daily_Mail

[mxyzptlk]

I'll believe it when it happens!

[bibblebub]

here is a map of the DM editorial policy http://tinyurl.com/37y83gs and this story would appear to be Barking

[jno]

useful map, bibblebub. I think higher pensions are an excellent idea (on account of qualifying for one one of these days) but there's some distance between a Green Paper and actually doing something.

[Jemisa]

What do you mean bibble its just a map of the underground??

jem

[bibblebub]

jem - just zoom in and you'll see that the station names have been replaced

[jno]

this is the really handy map, Jem, the tube loo map

http://ni.chol.as/med...sillymaps/toilets.jpg

[New Judge]

It is not so much the proposed amount that is the subject of the spin (although the proof of the pudding will be in the eating). It is more the fact that those of pensionable age who currently receive benefits (because they have made insufficient contributions to receive a pension) will in future be in receipt of a pension – the same pension as those who have contributed for theirs for many years by way of NI contributions.

Already many people who have made for than thirty years worth of NI payments have seen their payments beyond thirty years wasted (the minimum contributions for a full pension was recently reduced from 44/39 years to 30). Now it seems they will learn that they need not have contributed at all!

The Coalition government (which seems to be dominated on such matters by the LibDems) should come clean and just say that there will be no more State pension scheme, workers need not contribute (and see their NI payments reduced accordingly) and everybody will just get a nice £7k p.a. from the taxpayer when they reach State pension age.

The argument for doing this is to remove the need for a means test. A pension should not be means tested anyway, it should be simply related to contributions made. Other payments courtesy of the taxpayer should continue to be termed benefits and they should be subject to greater scrutiny, not less.

[dennisb66]

It's got more spin than a spinning top.Interesting it supposedly comes into effect in 2015,the next general election.That is if they last that long!!

[youngmafbog]

Removing layers of beurocracy has alot of merit and also cost saving. I'm not sure I am really seeing the difference in paying out the amount to all and paying some benefits and some pension, whats teh difference except less cahnce of fraud and alot less in cost of administration?

As for if they last that long, whats the alternative? Red ED? Do you really think he could offer less and get the grey vote ?

[anotheoldgit]

Why wait to 2015, why not 'from midnight tonight' the same as most increases are rushed through?

[dotty.]

Yes I agree with New Judge, i have already paid a few years NI more than I need to to get full state pension and now they have moved the goalposts on my retirement date I have to pay even more contributions more than i need to. What percentage of NI annual contributions is allocated to pension entitlement? I have now joined my new company's pension scheme and pay less NI but I don't understand why,

[New Judge]

Don't know the answer toyour first question, dotty. I only know there is no real relationship between what you pay in and what you receive.

You pay less NI if you are contracted out of the State Second Pension scheme. This is often the case with members of occupational pension schemes and it means you are not paying into the scheme which would give you a greater State pension.