NEWS Etc.
From many
different sources
|
For all news on the ECHR and the Judgement go to our Courts page |
|
| Remaking Pension Policy | |
| Letter from the Liberal Democrats 2/12/09 | |
| Public Sector Pensions to be Frozen till April 2011 | |
|
Interesting statements from the Civil Service Pensioners' Alliance |
The UK Pension System from an Institute of Directors paper |
No activity slowdown in sight
by John Markham, International Consortium of
British Pensioners
Since the hearing on September 2, work has continued at a hectic pace so that the International Consortium of British Pensioners (ICBP) will be able to hit the ground running as soon as the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) issues its judgment in our ‘frozen pensions’ case.
Just in case the Grand Chamber declared
earlier than anticipated, we had to be ready for action sooner rather than
later. This meant that, by Christmas, we had created and finalized a
strategic plan along with associated budgets (‘best case’ and ‘worst case’),
with everything massaged and approved by each of the ICBP partner
organizations in Canada, Australia and South Africa.
Since then, we have entered into a short, exploratory contract with a UK
based company specializing in media campaign consultancy. We have been
working closely with this company to
prepare maximum-impact ‘messaging’ for key
British media in the lead-up to the judgment, and to potentially establish
an ICBP media hotline that can begin operating as soon as the judgment is
issued.
Following a judgment in our favour, the UK Government will have six months in which to submit its proposed remedies to the Council of Europe, specifically the Committee of Ministers, in Brussels.
Throughout those months, we – and each one of ICBP’s individual partner organizations – will be working flat-out to ensure that those remedies reflect what is in our members’ best interests. In Britain, our lobbying efforts will greatly intensify.
In Canada, CABP members will be mobilized to assist in specific ways that we will spell out when the time is ready.
A possible timing ‘fly in the ointment’ that we foresee is the UK General Election, currently forecast to take place on May 6. Because of the potential for large-scale change in Parliament following the election, there is not likely to be a fully functional Government in operation before the end of May, and so we anticipate that the new Government may request a grace period (three months?) in which to familiarize itself with the case.
Meanwhile, ICBP has accepted an invitation to once again represent Britain’s expatriate elderly at the second ‘Europe on the Move’ conference, this one sponsored by Italy. It is interesting to note that some 20 years ago, the Italian Government created an organization to enable Italian communities abroad to participate in Italian politics – something sadly lacking in the UK. This organization has advisory and recommendation powers to the government in the emigration sector, and is spearheading the second ‘Europe on the Move’ conference.
CABP Director Sheila Telford participated in the first conference in Paris in 2008, using the event to help formulate an equitable exportable pension policy statement that was incorporated into the unanimously-approved conference declaration, the
Declaration of Paris, a ‘European policy for Europeans residing abroad.’ The declaration was then forwarded to Brussels as a recommended policy document.Sheila will once again pursue the case for expatriate pension equity at this year’s conference to be held in Rome at the end of April.
An entire morning will be devoted to the issue of exportable pensions. We continue to hope that this will soon result in action by Brussels, a step that would certainly reinforce a favourable ECHR judgment – or perhaps impugn a negative one.
Must UK obey European court ?by Rosalind Tosh, Editor of Justice. CABP Newsletter
A
nticipating the Grand Chamber’s judgment is like finally catching a glimpse in the distance of a longed-for oasis after three whole decades of thirsting in the desert. But with every court in the kingdom previously declaring that the UK Government has the prerogative to discriminate against us frozen pensioners, why would Westminster give a hang when the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) says differently and rules in our favour?Fortunately, there are measures in place to ensure it happens.
First and foremost, as a signatory to the European Convention on Human Rights, the UK has committed to abide by the final judgments of the ECHR. This obliges Her Majesty’s Government to, on the one hand, take measures in favour of successful applicants – in this case, that would be us – in order to put an end to the human rights violations we have suffered, and as far as possible to erase their consequences; and on the other hand to take measures to prevent new, similar violations from occurring.
Who makes sure the UK follows through?
Once the Grand Chamber has rendered judgment, responsibility for ensuring compliance passes to the Council of Europe, specifically the Committee of Ministers, a body composed of the Ministers for Foreign Affairs of the 47 member states or their permanent representatives. These are the officers tasked with supervising execution of ECHR judgments.
This committee will promptly invite the UK Government to detail the steps taken to pay any just satisfaction (compensation and/or costs and expenses) awarded by the court, and to detail the individual and general measures taken to fulfil any other terms of the judgment. If necessary, the Council of Europe’s Directorate General of Human Rights can assist by working with UK authorities to determine how to achieve compliance.
The Committee of Ministers will review the situation until Her Majesty’s Government has provided evidence that adequate remedial measures have indeed been implemented and payment has been made of any just satisfaction awarded.
If compliance is not forthcoming, diplomatic pressure – which can include heavy political sanctions – is imposed. The Committee of Ministers will not ‘sign off ’ on the case, thus marking the UK as being in violation of the European Convention on Human Rights. A signatory refusing to honour the Convention is not welcome at the table of the Council of Europe and thus will lose its influence there. Such action has seldom been found to be necessary, and indeed the UK has a good record of compliance with judgments.
Respect for ECHR judgments is a crucial element of the Council of Europe’s system for the protection of human rights and democracy in Europe and for the stability of European unification. CABP will continue to do its bit to ensure the UK Government does not fail to manifest that respect.
With information from the Council of Europe & the European Court of Human Rights web sites.
State pension Apartheid for
Women
By Nina
Montagu-Smith
Published: 2:20PM BST 20 Oct 2009 in the UK Telegraph
This article covers the effect on women of the recent move to reduce the number of years of National Insurance contributions required for the full state pension from 44 for men and 39 for women, to 30 for both from April next year.
Among other things of interest Ms
Montagu-Smith says:
"These women may now buy back extra years – up to 12 – to enable them to
claim the full state pension. But when Steve Webb, Liberal Democrat
spokesman for Work and Pensions, asked how many women had done so in the
House of Commons, the answer which came back was shockingly low. Just 204
women have applied, even though the vast majority would probably benefit
from buying back these years.
"It costs £627 to buy back one year of state pension entitlement. The state pension is currently £95.25 per week, so this equates to £2.44 per week (one-39th of the weekly amount), or £126.88 per year. By these calculations, you only have to live for five years to break even. Given that women tend to live longer than men, it would seem to make all the more sense for them to buy back years.
"Despite all the apparent largesse, the Government has not notified these women about this opportunity. It is banking on them not taking it up."
Extract from a letter from the
Liberal Democrats
2nd Dec. 2009
I can assure you that Liberal Democrats firmly
believe that pensioners that have paid taxes and contributed towards
National Insurance should not be penalised for choosing to live abroad in
retirement. We believe that the government should meet with groups
representing pensioners to discuss how provision of a pension can be secured
for those living overseas. We are very concerned that an estimated 524,730
British pensioners who live overseas have had their pensions "frozen" at the
rate that they were first paid when they moved abroad. As you know, under
this system in some countries, Britons living abroad become financially
worse off each year despite the fact they may have a full contribution
record their pension is not increased with inflation as it is for those
pensioners living in Britain. We continue to believe that there is a
pressing issue of injustice surrounding frozen pensions.
The Liberal Democrats also proposed an amendment to the 2006 Pensions Bill
that called for pensions, including for those served overseas, be linked to
prices and earnings. We again raised the issue of overseas pensions not
being up-rated in debates on the Pension Act 2007. Please rest assured that
the party’s long held commitment to challenging and rectifying the situation
remains steadfast.
From the Office of Nick Clegg MP
Pensioner tax code
problems highlighted
From BBC News
The above article covers the recent
(Jan/Feb 2010) distribution by HM Revenue & Customs of new tax code numbers.
It reveals that many errors are being made. But one error it does not
mention is that tax codes are being allocated to some pensioners living
overseas as if they were still in the UK. The letter states that if
you do not contact them within 1 month of the date on the letter tax will be
deducted in the UK by the Company paying the pension. At present this
only applies to Company Pensions.
These letters come to pensioners living in countries with a no double tax
agreement with the UK - PLEASE BE SURE TO REPLY - pointing this out.
The letters are sent from the UK to Malta, then posted in Malta. By the time you receive them there only a few days left before the month from the date of posting is up.