We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Unacceptable pensions divide?
ReportInvestor
Posts: 3,646 Forumite
This is Money
The gross disparity between the future pensions of those in the public sector and those in the private sector is widening rapidly every year.
When will the backlash begin? Because of the Conservative Party's desire to appeal to public sector workers in the next election (and the Labour Party's funk on the issue before the last election) it's not even on the political radar. (The LibDems are the most popular party among teachers so don't expect a rebellion to start there.)
Methinks that it will only become an issue once income taxes (rather than stealth taxes) have to rise to pay for public sector pensions.
The public hasn't even cottoned onto the fact that much of the explosive Council Tax increases are due to ballooning public sector pension deficits or costs.
Higher and higher pension costs for public sector workers mean that less money is available for front line public services.
That's not a [party] political statement - it's a hard fact that all parties & voters need to come to terms with.
The gross disparity between the future pensions of those in the public sector and those in the private sector is widening rapidly every year.
When will the backlash begin? Because of the Conservative Party's desire to appeal to public sector workers in the next election (and the Labour Party's funk on the issue before the last election) it's not even on the political radar. (The LibDems are the most popular party among teachers so don't expect a rebellion to start there.)
Methinks that it will only become an issue once income taxes (rather than stealth taxes) have to rise to pay for public sector pensions.
The public hasn't even cottoned onto the fact that much of the explosive Council Tax increases are due to ballooning public sector pension deficits or costs.
Higher and higher pension costs for public sector workers mean that less money is available for front line public services.
That's not a [party] political statement - it's a hard fact that all parties & voters need to come to terms with.
0
Comments
-
ReportInvestor wrote:This is Money
The gross disparity between the future pensions of those in the public sector and those in the private sector is widening rapidly every year.
When will the backlash begin? Because of the Conservative Party's desire to appeal to public sector workers in the next election (and the Labour Party's funk on the issue before the last election) it's not even on the political radar. (The LibDems are the most popular party among teachers so don't expect a rebellion to start there.)
Methinks that it will only become an issue once income taxes (rather than stealth taxes) have to rise to pay for public sector pensions.
they will do. There's some graphs in today's Guardian showing the massive extent of Labour tax rises needed by 2055.My policies are based not on some economics theory, but on things I and millions like me were brought up with: an honest day's work for an honest day's pay; live within your means; put by a nest egg for a rainy day; pay your bills on time; support the police - Margaret Thatcher.0 -
Didn't have you down as a Grauniad reader, wbb
. Gotta link?
These aren't specifically "Labour" tax rises.
They are just tax rises that have been postponed to any future government. You could only say that they were "Labour" tax increases if the Conservatives were opposing these future bills, but they aren't. No party has got this issue on its radar. They are all in "ostrich" mode.
And the future generation of heavily indebted students (with little prospect of final salary pension schemes themselves) are going to rebel against these bills.
But it will take five years or more.0 -
What is specifically Labour about it is that it was Labour which decided firstly to stuff the public sector with unneccessary extras and then to back down over the question of making them work a few years past 65, like the rest of us.
Having said that, there is a deafening silence from the Opposition benches regarding pensions...0 -
But neither the Tories nor the LibDems are saying that the public sector should be cut or that public sector pensions entitlements should be curtailed. So presumably that makes them tacitly compliant?
It's weird. Are we in a one party state?0 -
RI, I think the problem is that we are in a state where those who govern ( and I include the public sector in that class ) live in an entirely different world from those who are governed. If they had to suffer the same uncertainties as we do regarding retirement income you can be jolly sure it would get sorted out PDQ.0
-
I agree. The quickest way to effective pensions reform would be to convert all MPs to a defined contribution pension scheme tomorrow. 0
-
We're in the state that deductions from current private pensions and liability for public pensions will be somebody else's problem, so why be voted out of your cushy number...0
-
See here: The best 10 percent of income anybody ever has to pay!ReportInvestor wrote:I agree. The quickest way to effective pensions reform would be to convert all MPs to a defined contribution pension scheme tomorrow.
http://www.parliament.uk/documents/upload/M05.pdfMembers’ pensions
Current scheme
Members of Parliament belong to the parliamentary pension scheme. This is a final salary scheme with a current accrual rate of 1/40th. It is a contributory pension with the contribution rate now set at 10% of salary.
Look good?
Look worth giving up for the sake of working the public sector harder?
(I think not!)
Plus: if you get kicked out I believe they will make up the 'years' and give you a peerage (well, you couldn't be expected to 'pay' for one, now could you?) just to point out to voters the errors of their ways.....under construction.... COVID is a [discontinued] scam0 -
So Parliament is not going to address the issue.
Parties don't fancy it. Unions are dead against.
That leaves the CBI, Think Tanks, Pressure Groups and Websites.
But I don't think this is a Money Issue that Martin would want to touch with a barge pole.0 -
No government is going to fight public sector workers as a whole as they make up 20% of the UK workforce which is a lot of votes.
If you start fighting with firefighters, policemen, the armed forces, doctors and teachers then you are fighting groups with large powerful unions.
What most governments are going to do is cut public sector jobs in the areas where people think it's a waste of money i.e. DHSS and council admin jobs or can hide. Most non-labour councils have done this already. However all that happens is that they employ temporary workers from agencies at a greater cost per worker which makes their books look better to any accountant or auditor.
Part of the reason that council tax has increased is that central government decides the pay scale for people like teachers. So if the teachers get a pay increase it comes from your council tax but central government doesn't give enough money to fund it, the increased pension payments that go with it and the latest educational policy (fad).I'm not cynical I'm realistic
(If a link I give opens pop ups I won't know I don't use windows)0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.7K Spending & Discounts
- 244.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599.4K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.1K Life & Family
- 257.7K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards