RSS Feed
February 10th, 2012 
FAKE NEWS for the Zionist agenda
By
Becky Barrow and Kirsty Walker
Last updated at 11:43 PM on 9th February 2012
Millions of workers could be forced to delay retirement until they hit 70, a Government adviser has warned.
Lord Hutton of Furness, who is the pensions tsar, urged people to stop assuming they will retire by 65 like their parents and grandparents.
At the same time David Cameron revealed he is considering a Scandinavian model where the state pension age is linked to rapidly rising life expectancy.
The traditional retirement age of 65 is expected to be pushed back
In Norway, individuals can choose when they start taking a pension. The normal state pension age is 67, but it can be extended up to the age of 75, with a bigger payout as a result.
The Prime Minister announced his interest in the idea at the Nordic Baltic summit in Stockholm yesterday.
But a link to life expectancy would mean today’s younger workers having to wait until well into their 70s for the chance to retire.
One in three girls born today – and one in four boys – will live until they are 100.
In an address to the Institute of Economic Affairs, Lord Hutton said: ‘We are going to have to forget that [retiring at 65] as a way forward. We are going to have to work longer and pay more for it.’
The state pension age is being increased to 67 for men and women between 2026 and 2028 – and it is expected to keep on rising.
It is already possible to defer a state pension in Britain to get a bigger payout. Around one in ten retirees take this option.
Our ever longer lives
Would-be pensioners get an extra 10.4 per cent for each full year they defer, or they can opt for a lump sum payment plus interest, which is paid at 2 per cent above the Bank of England’s base rate.
The cost of the state pension is ballooning as babyboomers reach retirement age.
It is currently £74billion a year, but will rise by £4billion next year as record numbers reach 65.
In his speech, Lord Hutton also said gold-plated pensions enjoyed by public sector workers which allow them to retire at 60 were unsustainable and fundamentally unfair.
He insisted the case for change was clear cut and the system was ‘crying out for fundamental reform’.
The former Labour Cabinet minister, who was the author of the Government’s independent commission into public sector pensions, said the situation in the private sector was critical.
Only a third of private sector workers have a pension. By comparison, the majority of state workers can expect payments that currently average £7,840 a year.
Lord Hutton said there was a chronic lack of savings in the private sector.
‘The real tragedy is the lack of retirement savings in the private sector. That is the time bomb that is ticking,’ he added.
The delay in the retirement age could boost people’s retirement funds
The Government is trying to push through reforms that will see public sector workers pay more into their pensions and retire at a later age.
But the proposals have already been significantly watered down because of trenchant opposition from unions who say it is an unfair and unnecessary attack on their members’ rights.
A key change is that state workers’ pensions would switch from final salary schemes to less generous payouts based on the average salary throughout a career.
Lord Hutton said final salary schemes are ‘a throwback to a very different age with no place in a modern workplace’. He insisted: ‘Career average schemes are much fairer to low-paid workers.’
Professor Philip Booth, a director of the Institute of Economic Affairs, said: ‘The difference between the private sector and the public sector is a fundamental unfairness.
‘Those in the public sector do not bear the full costs of their pensions, unlike those in the private sector who have also been hit by a rapid scaling down of their pensions.’
In a bid to tackle the savings crisis, the Government is introducing rules from October forcing bosses to pay into a pension for private sector workers.
Steve Webb, the pensions minister, said: ‘The scale of this problem cannot be overestimated and that is why getting people into workplace pensions will be so transformative.
‘We will get five to eight million people saving for the first time or saving more, setting themselves on track for a more prosperous retirement.’
Share this article:
Here’s what other readers have said. Why not add your thoughts,
or debate this issue live on our message boards.
The comments below have not been moderated.
-
Newest -
Oldest -
Best rated -
Worst rated
Why not everyone retire when they wish, pay them a decent pension which unless they move abroad all goes back into the economy anyway via tax , vat ect. THis then leaves a job free for someone out of work so then the Go vernment sacs money on that person’s unemployment benefit . Everyone wins —- or is that idea too simple ?
Report abuse
A delay in the retirement age could boost peoples retirement funds.COULD being the operative word.Hang on while have a word with my financial adviser,Gordon Brown.
Report abuse
The Chinese have a mandatory retirement age of 55. My mother in law (Chinese) receives far more than a UK state pensioner, in relative buying power, and has had several increases in pension over the past 10 years. Her state pension is now at a level equaling the average annual income. People always complain about China, and point the finger. However, the vast majority of Chinese are very happy with how their government treats them. You’d be surprised.
Report abuse
Why not link retirement to years worked rather than age?
Surely a fairer system all round.
Say you have to do 40-45 years work paying your NI contributions before you are eligable for your pension.
That may those who work their entire lives get to retire at a decent age, whilst those who choose not too work must wait longer.
Report abuse
At least we can be sure Dave will be retired soon.
Report abuse
I agree with some of the comments on here that say retirement should be optional, my granny was employed by a government agency and had to retire at 65, even though she was fit and well, up until her death at age 84 she would constantly say she would love to go back to work, and if they called for her she’d be gone like a shot. Yes some may need to retire due to illness, some may want to continue working and some may just want to retire and relax and do something other than work, if you have paid into a system for 40+ years it should be completely optional.
Report abuse
There will be old people begging in the streets just like in Eastern Europe that’s where they are taking us.
Report abuse
I have a genetic condition that means my life expectancy is much shorter than average. Will I get to retire early?
Report abuse
That’s if you can get a job in the first place! Something’s gone seriously wrong with our economy. No wonder I’m leaving the country and letting other nations benefit from my doctorate and my many years’ experience!!
Report abuse
“Seems to me the Government should concentrate on getting people into work, rather than trying to force those already in work, to work even longer. The public sector worker works far less hours compared to the private sector worker, maybe they should start working the same sort of hours…. “”
Stop talking rubbish pal, I work 48 hours per week- maximum European allowed hours, as an nhs doctor. And that’s not counting the almost daily occurrence when I come home an hour late. The NHS runs on goodwill of its staff- and they repay us by robbing our pension pot. B*****s.
Report abuse
The views expressed in the contents above are those of our users and do not necessarily reflect the views of MailOnline.
Related posts:
Views: 0
Posted in 
Tags: 
