- Pension age increase criticized
- Health disparities highlighted
- Flexibility and fairness urged
According to a warning from a prominent think tank, there may be insufficient workers remaining to support pensioners if the state pension age is not drastically increased.
Longtime advocate for the rights of the elderly and former pensions minister Ros Altmann, who is now a member of the House of Lords, asserts that the majority of workers would be penalized by the proposal.
It is abhorrent to increase the state pension age to 71 by 2040. It would ultimately cause more individuals to fall into destitution.
Individuals no older than the early 50s would be susceptible to this International Longevity Centre proposal.
Already, the increased state pension age to 66 has exacerbated the plight of those without adequate private pensions, who are frequently in poorer health, by causing greater hardship.
By the early 1970s, only the highest 10% of the population of the United Kingdom remains healthy. Therefore, by the mid-60s, the majority of the population is ill, and social policy must account for this.
The Office for National Statistics reports that 40% of low-income men and women are healthy until age 61 or 62.
Delaying state pension payments for ailing employees in order to reduce costs benefits those who are better off financially.
While penalizing most people, it would bias state pension expenditure toward wealthy seniors who live longer.
Individuals who are in good health and possess sufficient financial resources to postpone receiving the state pension may do so voluntarily in return for increased payments.
Increasing disadvantage for middle-income and lower-income groups is not good for social welfare.
Employees contribute substantial amounts to their state pensions.
The state pension is a component of the social contract for all employees. Both the employee and their employer are required to make substantial contributions to national insurance in order to secure the bare minimum state pension support in the event that they become unable to work in the future.
Such is the social contract. The state pension remains the fundamental pillar of social assistance. Due to individual variances, chronological age is not a reliable criterion for cost-cutting decisions.
The current disparity in private pension coverage renders the mere increase in the state pension age insufficient justification, given the rising ‘average’ life expectancy.
Millions of individuals continue to have limited or no private pension provision despite the government spending over £70 billion annually on tax and National Insurance reliefs for private pensions and auto-enrolment, which has been a tremendous success thus far in expanding the coverage of private workplace pensions.
Individuals in their early 50s or younger may not have the luxury of time to establish a private pension. This is to supplement the income they receive from the state pension while they are unable to work.
The government should explore alternative cost-saving measures that contribute to increased flexibility and impartiality. A patient’s duration of National Insurance coverage and health status may be taken into account.
Prioritize health prevention and the fight against ageism.
Significant disparities in health exist throughout the nation.
Further escalating the starting age for state pensions will put an increasing number of individuals in their sixties at risk of being compelled to work despite their poor health or of subsisting on food rations until the government effectively enhances NHS preventive health measures to better accommodate the objective of promoting longevity.
Likewise, ageism has rendered the British labour market unprepared for this. Despite the government’s efforts to promote and facilitate extended working lives, much progress remains to be made in this regard.
It must assist a greater number of employers in retaining, retraining, and recruiting older workers, who continue to encounter ageism in the workplace and are frequently “managed out,” or disregarded for in-work training and recruitment, due to the stereotype that they are either too elderly or about to retire.
Individuals in their sixties continue to encounter workplace discrimination. Extending the waiting period for the initiation of their state pensions exposes them to the risk of unemployment.
Increased encouragement of part-time employment prior to complete retirement may alleviate pressures on state pension funds.
Also, greater flexibility is required with regard to early pension payments for those who are truly unable to work.
Sunak: Priority in Northern Ireland not constitutional change
