Next APPG Meeting: Wednesday 1 November 2017.

September 8, 2017 Frozen Pensions 55 Comments

The next meeting of the APPG for Frozen British Pensions is scheduled for Wednesday 1 November, at 10am, in Room R, Portcullis House.

The meeting will be attended by a delegation of leading Frozen Pension Campaigners, organised by the International Consortium of British Pensioners (ICBP).

Speakers will include:

  • Sheila Telford (Chair, International Consortium of British Pensioners, from Canada)
  • Brian Owles (Chair, British Pensioners in Australia, from Australia)
  • Ian Andexer (Chair, Canadian Alliance of British Pensioners, from Canada)
  • John Duffy (Chair, British Caribbean Pensioners Association, from Antigua)
  • Jim Tilley (Director ICBP, from Australia)
  • Colin Rainsbury (Director, ICBP, from Canada)

The Minister for Pensions, Guy Opperman, has been invited to address the meeting.

We hope to welcome new MPs interested in this issue, as well our longstanding members and supporters from both the Commons and Lords.

More details, including the full Agenda, will be published in due course.

#APPG#Frozen British Pensions#frozen pensions#Guy Opperman#ICBP#Roger Gale

Previous Post

Next Post

Comments

  1. Clive Evans
    October 6, 2017 - 2:38 am

    . I understand that the APPG is considering yet again to recommend the partial up-rating of pensions for ‘frozen’ pensioners.

    May I respectfully advise that those frozen pensioners resident in Thailand that I represent are against this proposal and request that full, and only full, up-rating should be pursued as the alternative continues to penalise frozen pensioners whose pensions devalue on an annual basis. We cannot agree to partial uprating and the pensioners in the EU continue with a full index linked pension

    The arguments against up-rating that are constantly forthcoming from UK Gov are not in our opinion any longer valid. It has been conceded that Reciprocal Agreements are not necessary as domestic legislation can provide for up-rating.

    The fact that UK Gov only up-rates when it has a legal obligation to do so is also no longer valid. Section 20 of the Pensions Act provides that the Minister MAY make regulations to withhold the up-rating. This is not a legal obligation on the Minister.

    Clive Evans – Thailand

  2. clive walford
    October 6, 2017 - 7:27 am

    Partial uprating is not a solution to the frozen pension policy. It is not even a “step to Parity”. What it is, is a more discriminatory policy than we have now. If this policy is introduced as a step in the right direction it will of course never be followed by Parity.
    Partial Uprating is locally known as “the wait till they die” solution to the frozen pension policy. i.e. Parity will be obtained only when all existing frozen pensioners are dead.
    We do not consider that as a justifiable policy by this government or any political party. In fact it is an insult to the frozen pensioners.
    A 95 year old pensioner that retired 30 years ago to a frozen pension country today will still be on that 30 year out dated pension of less than £40. If it is uprated by 2.5% how far will that go? Of course the 2.5% figure will be reduced in all probabilities!
    Both the ICBP and APPG were basically conned to support PU. (the only pensioners to gain is of course the UK pensioners. It also satisfied the EU pensioners and expat pensioners that already receive the annual increase).
    The government says 1) we cant afford it. 2) no reciprocal Agreement. 3) we only uprate where legally required to do so.
    2) The APPG confirms RAs are not required to uprate. (as did the then Minister Steve Webb. The DSS and F of I. office).
    1) Cant afford it? What have the pensioners and workers been paying into all their working life? They paid their mandatory NATIONAL INSURANCE CONTRIBUTIONS, NOT A TAX, into what they all knew as the secured fund, The NIS Fund. Set up to secure their future after retirement. Now the government say there is no fund, tax payers would foot the £590 million bill to uprate. The NIS funds have a balance of over £20billion. Secured and safe? No the government says forget those frozen pensioners, they are dying off so let’s spend their contributions on something else.
    Cant afford it? Its such a high amount! Equal to 4 weeks payment to be in the EU! A fraction of the £13+billion for overseas aid. (Incidentally it was reported in a press article they were struggling to spend it all this year). HS2 original estimates £30 billion. Approved! Then later that was doubled to £60 Billion. Recently again increase by £100 million. Of course they had to make another few £ billion for super high speed broadband.
    3) Only uprate where we are legally required to. The government made the regulation to withhold uprating. The Pension Act does not state uprating to overseas pensioners must be withheld. Just the opposite actually. Part one section 2 says all workers are entitled to the pension only depending on their CONTRIBUTORY YEARS.
    section 20 only says a regulation MAY be made to withhold uprating. So what justifiable reason is there to do so?
    Cost? disproven. RAs? disproven. Legal requirement? disproven.
    The government borrow huge amounts which the tax payers have to pay for. NIS contributors have and are paying for the pension, but are denied their entitlement they paid for.
    The APPG surely has a moral duty to pensioners to ensure they get their hard earned entitlement of the full pension.
    Since PU was insidiously introduced years ago I have not had not had any emails or seen comments agreeing to it. The ordinary pensioners were never given the opportunity to voice their views. I would hazard a guess that of the 540,000 frozen pensioners only a very small %age might reluctantly agree to it in the absence of another alternative. Even that small %age would more readily accept something like aged uprating over 3 or 4 years.(oldest first).
    More political parties are turning to agree the frozen pension policy should go.
    All members of the APPG should now be pressing their party to end this disgraceful policy now.
    Clive Walford.
    Chairman of PPiI, (pension parity in Indonesia) Member of BPiA member of BFPSA.

  3. Peter Hardcastle
    October 6, 2017 - 10:50 am

    Can we not get a celebrity to help our cause or has it been tried previously,Prince Charles spring to mind after all he is a pensioner.

    Peter,
    Thailand.

  4. Peter Wyborn
    October 7, 2017 - 4:20 am

    The idea of partial uprating should be abandoned. If UK pensioners in the EU receive the benefit of full index linked pensions after the UK leaves the EU then the current frozen pensioners must also receive full pension parity.
    If all else has failed, and as a last resort, in order to reach a settlement, I would agree to a phased implementation of full uprating over a period of not more than 3 years, in order of pension age, oldest first.
    Despite repeated assurances by ICBP that they have no intention of claiming back payments, I have a feeling that the Government still fears that as a possibility. Something needs to be done to allay those fears.
    Peter Wyborn. Thailand

  5. Judith Edmonds
    October 10, 2017 - 9:27 am

    I live in Thailand and agree that partial uprating is not what I would like.

    We paid into the pension fund all our working life so should have complete pension parity.

    Please do not penalise pensioners for leaving the UK.

  6. Brian Corrigan
    October 12, 2017 - 3:52 pm

    There is no legal obligation to up rate the pensions of EU expats once the UK leaves the EU. There is also no requirement for reciprocal agreements. Why then are 450,000 pensioners living in so called frozen countries being denied their fully indexed pensions,while pensioners living in the EU enjoy full indexing of their pensions??

  7. Brian Corrigan
    October 12, 2017 - 3:54 pm

    Why are 450,000 pensioners living in so called frozen countries being denied their fully indexed pensions,while pensioners living in the EU enjoy full indexing of their pensions??

  8. clive walford
    October 12, 2017 - 8:29 pm

    Brian C.
    The legal requirement to uprate EU pensioners, (and 540,000 frozen pension ) is part 1 section 2 of the pension Act 2014. “A person is entitled to a State Pension if-
    a) the person has reached pensionable age, and
    b) the person has 35 or more qualifying years”.
    it is the SI, The regulation, that withholds uprating. Section 20 of the Act only says a Regulation MAY be made to withhold uprating to overseas pensioners. As you know SI is a negative procedure. Merely tabled in the commons, (often lumped in with others), and automatically passed after a short time.
    If the government have a good sound strong reason to withhold uprating to one or more countries then the SI would be a quick way to do it. (e.g. if country A declared any monies entering their country will be confiscated and put in their general funds that would be a good case not to just withhold uprating but any money). Of course the UK government would not put it in their general fund would they? Of course not they would put it in a secured fund set up for that purpose. A bit similar to the NIS fund?
    The governments 3 reasons are all flawed without question. Where did they come from? Sarcastically I can only suggest from a 70 year old Christmas cracker.

  9. Jane Davies
    October 12, 2017 - 11:55 pm

    No no and no again….partial uprating does not end the discrimination being suffered by the 4% who are victims of the frozen pension scandal. Fully indexed pensions are enjoyed by 96% of state pensioners wherever they live in the world and yet 4% , who have paid for their pensions under the same terms as everyone else, have their indexing withheld by the UK government. Every excuse given by the DWP as to why this injustice has been allowed to go on has been proven to be untrue and the time has now come, with the EU expats being told their indexing is safe, for the 4% to be treated the same. It is an OUTRAGE that a government can treat it’s own seniors in this shabby way, why is this allowed to continue year after year? Shame on the UK government and the DWP……shame on you.

  10. Peter Wyborn
    October 13, 2017 - 4:46 am

    Why is it that only one Conservative MP has put his signature to EDM159?

  11. Brian Corrigan
    October 13, 2017 - 7:01 am

    If full up rating for all is not possible in one go, I would like to see a phased in system,oldest first,and spread over 2-3 years starting in April 2018.

  12. Norma Maloney
    October 14, 2017 - 10:36 am

    As the years go by, according to FOI requests, more and more frozen pensioners are returning to the UK because they can no longer live on their frozen pension, they in turn are putting a strain on the NHS, the social housing as well as costing the UK on care systems and benefits. Are the powers in Westminster so blind that they cannot see that in the long run this will cost them more money than paying the full pension parity? Pensioner’s living in some of the frozen countries can no longer afford private health care so to return is the only option available. It is only a matter of addition and subtraction or can they not do simple mathematics? Partial is not an option, it will not stop pensioners returning to the UK they need full indexing.

  13. Brian Corrigan
    October 15, 2017 - 4:20 am

    Why so many representatives from Canada?

  14. Andy Robertson-Fox
    October 16, 2017 - 3:34 pm

    Brian Corrigan you ask why so many from Canada – strange question. But I make it there are the chairs of CABP and BPiA, two ICBP Directors – one from Australia and one form Canada and the ICBP Chair….not sure where you see a problem.

  15. bluebottle1
    October 25, 2017 - 3:07 am

    Being fairly new to this and being one of the honest pensioners, just over six years since I left the cold of the UK this to me is getting now where fast. How many years have some of you been chasing your tails without one glimmer of achieving your goal 40, 50.
    I made a comment that we need a celebrity to help bring this injustice into the limelight, most people outside these forums are not even aware of our plight, it was totally ignored. It needs saying that the same old, forgive the word, failed ideas have been used for decades without success the only way to solve this injustice is to sham the govermant who ever they may be into submission of fear of loosing votes something many of you either do not bother doing or you do not fall outside the 15 year rule. Political parties take note of people with the power to remove them from office if you haven’t a vote you are dispensable. By promoting our cause with a celebrity is in my view the only way forward , Bluebottle1.

  16. Tony Evans
    October 25, 2017 - 3:01 pm

    I live in Thailand and my pension has been frozen since 2004.
    Partial uprating does not help much those most in need who have been frozen for many many years.
    I paid into the pension fund all my working life so I just do not understand why I do not have pension parity. I understood that it was an entitlement.
    I believe that if full pension parity is not immediately possible then a system of uprating to full pensions for those pensioners who have been frozen the longest and completed for all frozen pensioners in no more than 3 years.

    Tony Evans

  17. clive walford
    October 26, 2017 - 4:37 am

    i suggested the government should use a mere 590 million of the 13 billion overseas aid. (which according to a recent press report their struggling to spend it all this year).”no its not allowed by law”. I scratched my head and said, “but you use our pension fund for other things and now cant pay us. Surely the fund was is a “secured” fund protected by law?- “Oh well thats different. We are the government so we can do what we want to do, not what you want/need us to do. “So how do you define that?” “Simple. Its what as we know as tough luck on you law. ,

  18. Rhett Hazlitt
    October 26, 2017 - 7:53 am

    I served in the British army for eleven years, getting three GSM’s for putting my neck on the line. I retired to South Africa in 2010, as children and grandchildren now live here. Having payed in at the higher rate ALL my life I am now enjoying a “frozen pension”. Why? This is the equivalent to fraud by the British Government!

  19. Kenneth Platt
    October 26, 2017 - 10:50 am

    I live in South Africa and say NO TO PARTIAL UPRATING
    I have paid my contributions and therefore entitled to full pension
    this is discrimination.
    Are you just waiting for us all to die in poverty because of your meanness
    Pay us our dues

  20. Jacqui Platt
    October 26, 2017 - 10:51 am

    I live in South Africa and say NO TO PARTIAL UPRATING
    I have paid my contributions and therefore entitled to full pension
    this is discrimination.
    Are you just waiting for us all to die in poverty because of your meanness
    Pay us our dues I want to be able to live out my life without a struggle

  21. Brian Manns
    October 26, 2017 - 11:51 am

    My wife and I live in Canada and are violently opposed to “partial uprating”
    Like all others, we have paid our contributions and request full pensions. I have been receiving my pension for 13 years and with the pound sliding lower and lower in value it’s even worse.

  22. clive walford
    October 26, 2017 - 7:24 pm

    My lords, Ladies and gentleman, as members of the APPG I strongly suggest you read the “Express” article:
    http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/870695/Brexit-news-Foreign-aid-international-development-EU-trade-deal-Priti-Patel?utm_source=CRM&utm_medium=Email&utm_content=Foreign_aid_budget_trade_deals&utm_campaign=Brexit_email
    This article arrived in my inbox about 10 hours after I added a second comment, (International Aid department said illegal to use aid to uprate frozen pensions) to, this page of the APPG website.
    I will just pick a few extracts and assume you will all read the article fully.
    1) the foreign aid budget “will be used to promote “Global Britain” and be used in the “national interest” to help secure post-Brexit trade deals”.
    So was the previous statement, (illegal to use Aid for other purposes), a lie or is this latest statement manipulation of the law to suit their use of Aid now? (as reported they were struggling to spend the Aid this year).
    The fund used to “Promote Global Britain”. Is that like how they spent millions previously to promote soccer in China?
    The Aid to be “used to help secure post Brexit trade deals”. Should that not come out of the Department of Trade and Industry budget? (renamed)
    2) Ms Patel also said that “the money would continue to support efforts to alleviate poverty around the world”.
    Well after all that is what it is for isn’t it?
    Frozen pensioners “around the world” are being pushed into the poverty belt by the British governments frozen pension policy. (By a regulation not by the Pension Act itself).
    3) “We can absolutely use it for humanitarian, but also for prosperity, Britain post-Brexit, on trade and economic development”.
    Would it not be a humanitarian act to keep frozen pensioners out of the poverty belt?
    4)”There are a whole raft of opportunities there where we can use that money for our national interest, or Global Britain’s interest, as well as helping to alleviate poverty around the world and doing more in terms of international development too.”
    My Lords Ladies and Gentlemen surely that statement sounds as though the real aim for the Aid, poverty and development, now takes second place in that departments agenda? Does it not also suggest that the 0.7% is in fact too high? (I must make my personal observation that it would appear that Ms Patel is far more interested in empire building).
    5)“UK would no longer send funds “unconditionally” to Brussels with little or no oversight or transparency as to how or where they were spent.
    When a debate was forced on that department by the high numbers signing the petition against the announce 12.4 billion overseas aid budget, they said they would ensure all schemes would be investigated carefully as to ensure there was no inappropriate spending. I would suggest that in the light of that last paragraph they did not comply with the agreed action in that debate.
    6) “Once we leave the European Union on 29 March 2019, we will look at all programmes. We are not going to just write cheques unconditionally, absolutely not, in the way that we have done to the European Commission.
    I repeat the previous paragraph to that one.
    There is then some strong criticisms from the Liberal Democrats, which I will leave you to mull over and submit good arguments that would be beneficial to the argument for full parity for all frozen pensioners.
    I would suggest that this article and comments gives you good cause to get all parties that support the removal of the frozen pension policy to get 3 line “whips” out and force the government to remove this policy from the statutes and force immediate action to remove section 20 from the current Pension Act 2014, and equivalent part of previous Acts, or regulations, that apply the frozen pension policy to those pre 6 April 2017 pensioners.
    Finally after all Ms Patel has said in her empire building speech I can see no valid reason for her to argue against Overseas Aid being used, and should be used, to fulfill the requirements of the Pension Act 2014 part 1section 2 that all persons are entitled to the full State Pension only depending on their contributory years!

  23. Susannah Maria Zillah Warner
    October 26, 2017 - 8:10 pm

    I love in Australia and I say no to partial uprating mine has been frozen since 1996

  24. Robert Hill
    October 26, 2017 - 8:43 pm

    Please settle this vexed issue and give us full up-rating. You know it is morally right to do so, and if you can find over £1 billion for Northern Ireland (where did that money come from?), then you can find a much smaller sum to solve this problem.

  25. Stephen Robbins
    October 26, 2017 - 9:04 pm

    To whom it concerns:
    Picture this: You have diligently made a weekly contribution to a savings account in a chartered bank every week for 40 years, and then when you needed to withdraw the savings you were denied the interest accrued on the contributions because you lived abroad.
    This is exactly what the UK Government is doing with my State Pension.
    I am a British citizen that resides in Canada, my UK state pension is frozen!
    Over 40 years ago I relocated, but wishing to maintain my UK government benefits regardless if I returned or not, I continued to pay NI premiums and should I return to the UK would be entitled to full benefits as if I had lived in the UK for the last 40 years. Before my pension was payable I never received any benefits while I was living abroad!
    However, I married in Canada and now with Canadian Children and grandchildren, I think anyone would agree, returning to live in the UK is neither reasonable nor practical.
    I am retired, certainly not impoverished but living modestly, and the state pension benefit that I continued to contribute to is being eroded by the most unfair and illogical rule that one could imagine. Freezing pensions and denying me a level of state pension to which I am entirely entitled to is plain and simply ‘unfair’, and infringes upon my human rights.
    If I lived just 100 miles south in the United States my pension would not be frozen. How does this make any sense?
    And here’s another thing that boggles my mind: My understanding is that if I return to the UK for a vacation, I am entitled to an ‘unfrozen’ pension for that period.
    Please correct this injustice and pay the state pension that British citizens living abroad are entitled to.
    Thank you.
    Steve Robbins

  26. Jonathan Green
    October 26, 2017 - 10:13 pm

    I live in Australia and am disgusted that having never been out of a job and paid taxes and NI all my life (& still paying tax on my UK pensions too!), I am treated as a second class citizen when it comes to state pension increases.

    If the withholding of pension increases was due to my colour, religion, sex or sexual preference, the government would HAVE to sort it out or be accused of discrimination.

    The same rules (& thus payments) should apply to everyone solely on the basis of what they have paid into the system irrespective of colour, religion, sex, sexual preference AND GEOGRAPHICAL LOCATION.

    Having heard that the APPG is considering the PARTIAL upgrading of affected pensions I felt compelled to write to oppose the idea. Full parity is the only fair way to go.

    By even considering a PARTIAL upgrading proves that there IS inequality in the current system that needs to be put right.

    Would YOU think it fair if pensioners in the next county to where you live were given increases in their pensions, but you weren’t? Would you then think the matter settled fairly if, in the hope to appease you, you were offered a partial increase?

    I very much doubt it.

  27. Martin Hales
    October 26, 2017 - 10:29 pm

    I have said this before and I am certainly not unique in saying that I and many others have served in the Armed Forces of the UK. I could well imagine the reaction if we had all said we will only do a partial amount of the work as we would not be getting our full pension.

    The UK Government acts as if other countries do not have inflation as we all know they do and consequently this decreases the value of our pension each year and has an impact on our standard of living.

    My wife and I have both paid full NI contributions and expected to be paid the full entitlement that would keep up with inflation for the remainder of our life. Therefore we say “NO” to PARTIAL UPRATING.

  28. John Smith
    October 26, 2017 - 11:37 pm

    I am an aged British pensioner who served in the Royal Air Force for thirteen years. I saw active service in three areas of unpleasantness, the Canal Zone (when Gamal Abdul Nasser was playing up), Cyprus, (EOKA), and Singapore. I also spent a short time in Gibralter and in Germany. After my contracted time was completed, I moved to Australia with my Australian born wife. Clearly I am not entitled to a full age pension but I would like to see my pittance uprated as it would have been had I stayed in England when I retired.

  29. Jack Stoner
    October 26, 2017 - 11:51 pm

    Partial uprating will not eliminate the unfair, immoral, and discriminatory aspects of selective pension indexation and should not even be considered as an appropriate alternative to our mandatory pension entitlement which we have paid into the NIF.

  30. Stuart Robertson-Fox
    October 27, 2017 - 1:15 am

    Partial uprating is not an option. I, along with many others, have bought, over a forty four year period, a pension scheme, not, as some would have it, a ‘Benefit’. I now require that the UK Government honour their obligation to pay me, in full, the current rate for a UK pension, as I am entitled to. A full pension is what I signed up for, it is what I have paid for in full, and it is what I now require. Were it a commercial pension company behaving in the way the UK government are behaving they would be sent to prison and be required to make full restitution for the unpaid frozen element. There is no way we should allow the government to attempt to mitigate its wrongdoing by paying a partial uprate. We are entitled to the full amount. The Court of Human Rights gave a flawed judgement when they gave, as a reason for not restoring the pension, the fact that we who choose to live overseas no longer paid income tax, this judgement only applied to one individual from South Africa and cannot be applied to, or used as a legal precedent by the UK government, to deny those of us that do pay UK tax, the full index linked pension. We should take our case through the courts again, despite the UK government saying we can’t, as any precedent that applies to the rest of us has not been set. I am willing to contribute £250.00 to a legal fund.

  31. Tony Bell
    October 27, 2017 - 2:56 am

    I will not accept partial uprating, I have paid towards my pension and I want that which is due to me.

  32. mary barber
    October 27, 2017 - 3:39 am

    I moved to Australia because all my family are here but just because of this I do not see any reason for not paying my full pension since i paid it in ,not just a bit.if I moved to mauritius I would be entitled to a full pension.if I was to have a holiday in the uk or Europe I would receive a full pension.Where is the sense in all of this. Please give us what we are entitled to no matter where we live.

  33. George Morley
    October 28, 2017 - 4:11 am

    Partial uprating is an insult to so many pensioners like myself who will be 83 on Remembrance Day and will never see any real benefit should only partial uprating be granted tomorrow !
    The members of the APPG must realise this and see the immorality of seeking such an agreement.
    The Government have gained so much money by this ‘fraudulent’ pension policy because they have said in the past that backdating would be out of the question because of the cost – so how much more blood would you like ?
    It is not just an immoral policy against the pensioners involved but is an abuse of a Parliamentary Act in my view to use such a method to impose this discrimination on just a minority of pensioners.
    There is not one person present here that can say otherwise whether a Member of Parliament or a private citizen and you all know it is wrong.
    So let us see some forward movement and justice Mr Opperman as others before you have failed in what is their duty surely as Pensions Minister to look after the pensioners under your wing ?
    How about your Code of Conduct being applied.

  34. James Nelson
    October 28, 2017 - 5:59 am

    Partial uprating would still leave pensioners with less than their proper pensions. The problem would never go away until the last of the present generation of frozen pensioners died. A feasible and much more equitable way would be to grant immediate full uprating to all pensioners over a selected threshold age and then to reduce the threshold over a fairly short period of years, so that eventually all overseas pensioners would have pensioners on an equal basis with those resident in the UK.

  35. David Page
    October 28, 2017 - 6:32 am

    I would like to say NO to partial uprating.

    I now live in Australia rather than one of the lucky countries that receive uprating.

    We were not asked to “partially pay” into the Government’s mandatory scheme – so why
    should we now be asked to partially retrieve our rightful monies.

  36. Brian Corrigan
    October 28, 2017 - 6:53 am

    No to partial uprating. We want the pensions we have paid for. If pensioners in the EU can have their pensions indexed. What is stopping the British Government indexing all expat pensioners?

  37. Sara
    October 28, 2017 - 7:12 am

    I have been on a frozen pension since 1995. I say no to a partial pension. Why should I accept less than it is my right to receive. The UK government’s behaviour on this matter is unbelievably unethical and I feel completely disempowered.

  38. Cheryl Harvey
    October 28, 2017 - 7:38 am

    Partial uprating is in fact AGE discrimination – the older you are the worse it affects you. This is then nothing to do with whether or not a country has a Reciprocal Agreement with the UK, it is discrimination against older people. Surely legal cases would result from such outrageous discrimination?

  39. Linda
    October 28, 2017 - 10:17 am

    NO to partial updating….same rules should apply to everyone who receives a UK Pension no if’s or but’s ! One rule for all! How can they lie straight in their beds at night makes you wonder….

  40. Vivienne Aird
    October 28, 2017 - 9:53 pm

    I paid in advance for my pension for 44 years. No-one warned me that if I intended to move to another country I should choose one that is not ‘frozen’. Unluckily I ‘chose’ one where my only child and grandchildren are living and now find myself with a pension which is less than half of that which I would have received in a non-frozen country, and which is worth less and less with each year that passes. Partial uprating, for me, would simply continue the discrimination because I am approaching 80 and have insufficient years left for it to make any difference. How I wish I had paid those 44 years worth of contributions into a private pension fund where my pension could never have been withheld from me. Indeed had that happened it would have rightly been treated as fraud and they would have been tried and convicted in a court of law. Is there no such punishment for the British Government?

  41. Robin Beeson
    October 29, 2017 - 3:17 am

    I have paid full contributions for 49 years and was never told that my pension would be frozen until after a final decision had been made to move to Indonesia – in fact – I had
    never heard of frozen pensions’ before that.

  42. Mike Darbon
    October 29, 2017 - 4:10 am

    I paid in full and expect pension in full including the annual increases

  43. George Morley
    October 29, 2017 - 5:30 pm

    Following on from my previous comment consideration must be given to The Seven Principles of Public Life have been amended over the years.
    Of the seven there are two which are blatantly ignored and I have copied them here :
    Objectivity – Holders of public office must act and take decisions impartially, fairly and on merit, using the best evidence and without discrimination or bias.
    Honesty – Holders of public office should be truthful
    Mr Opperman can you honestly say that this (objectivity) does not apply to the state pension noting that the contributions made by the pensioner is the only requirement for this ‘entitlement’ – a word that Steve Webb used but failed to keep.
    And as for involving another country for what is a UK Government Domestic policy by demanding an unnecessary agreement (honesty) with them is saying that they must take responsibility for the lack of indexation when this is totally false – Canada uprate their pensioners in UK which leaves no valid argument to demand such an agreement and the DWP have admitted that it is not necessary anyway.

  44. Valerie Anne Hyland
    October 30, 2017 - 1:11 am

    My husband who is English lived in France and worked for a Dutch company for which he paid into a State pension .. he will get that pension, index linked no matter where he lives so why can’t the uk do the honourable thing and pay me what I paid into. Not only is my pension frozen but because of the devalued pound what I get, which varies every month, is getting less and less, it’s not fair.

    I would like to know who was responsible when talks were being held regarding the Commonwealth conditions, who sat at the table and neglected or decided not to protect pensioners right. Something that was obviously not neglected with the EU.

  45. Susan Joyce
    October 30, 2017 - 1:57 pm

    When we’ve paid all our contributions in full, some voluntarily when we were working out of the UK, we are now treated as second or third class retirees because we prefer to live somewhere warmer than the UK. We can’t use the NHS, we have to pay tax on our pensions, but don’t have access to other UK services, and we don’t have a vote!
    Unfreeze our pensions and play fair.

  46. Mr Michael Roberts
    November 5, 2017 - 4:39 am

    Please can anybody inform me of result of the meeting on 1 Nov 2017

  47. John West
    November 8, 2017 - 4:24 am

    Hi Everyone and see the outcome of what was discussed on November 1st and yes have been very active in this with a few others behind the scenes and have worked long hours and not just formyself in Thailand, but for us all and not going to repeat my comments as they are on the sites.
    I have written to Clive Evans and he has not replied to me and saw an earlier post that he is our representative. He certainly for some reason representing me, but sent various thank yous to Mhira Black and Ian Blackford who has been brilliant
    Yes great more MP’s coming on board and yes again it is just not more debate or sympathy we need but some ACTION (yes that word AGAIN) and should there be another debate in the House, just how many MP’s are going to show up and a huge IF is we ever come to a vote, then the 3 line Whip will come in to force.
    Nice to see 4 newspapers going to write articles in the week/ months ahead, and yes this issue has been made well aware so much more than a couple of years ago.
    Still the issue is that a deliberate Act of Parliament and yes a domestic legislation, which can be easily overturned, but the powers that be IE this Government will simply not act, even though many privately can see the gross and barbaric injustice of this.
    They keep saying costs and again we see this Foreign Aid business in the Express again and somehow the UK can find 13 billion and rising every year and then told by this disgusting PM that it is only a reserve.
    And what exactly the monies from the National Insurance Fund gone to.
    Oh yes for other purposes for not it is supposed to be used on.
    I am afraid still so few of the so called public servants who could do the fair thing, but simply will not.
    A wonderful Country and a disgrace for all the British born and bred Citizens and yet EU expats not only get annual increases, but the full amount.
    In any case what has this to do with the EU anyway, NOTHING and we supposed to be leaving it.
    Also and it is the truth our foreign friends and not being at all discriminatory or indeed racist and just saying the truth getting all and sundry benefits.
    The UK have enough scroungers as it is and been hearing that people giving out false addresses in the UK (ie sisters or relatives addresses) and living in Thailand and elsewher and probably getting the full pension.
    NOTE This does not apply to me and many others and you see why all our blood boils.
    Thanks and we keep saying the same things (well some of us) hundreds upon hundreds of times.
    Look at WASP1 and I fully support our sisters (some indeed married to frozen state husbands) and look at the thousands upon thousands of signatures and still nothing has been done. I would also add that I have taken some ACTION (IS ANYONE WHO COULD DO SOMETHING ABLE TO READ OR UNDERSTAND THIS SIMPLE) And I have signed various petitions.
    So where do we go from here?

  48. John West
    November 8, 2017 - 4:51 am

    Sorry can not amend ofcourse referring to Clive Evans he probably just forgot me, but I represent us all Clive all of us tc

  49. John West
    November 8, 2017 - 4:57 am

    The trouble is those who are supposed to represent us our so called public figures never ever read these artciles and on other posts,
    1/ They too busy looking out for themselve
    2/ Can not read (not relevant but sure think Trump can not with several of our own)
    3/ Wishing fpr their lunch
    4/ awaiting their huge annual increases in salary and expenditure allowances.
    We all know deliberately putting us in furthur povery,
    What delightful Contry and well looking after our own and what date did this actually commence, or have I missed something?

  50. John West
    November 8, 2017 - 5:02 am

    Sorry spelling mistakes and would normally correct on edit or before, but at least I know I make several mistakes unlike others and do not use blatent, barbaric discrimination against our own British born and bred British.
    Once such a proud Nation and belonging to everyone else now.
    Correction and bound to get trolled my mistakes LOL and one has to somehow these days)
    1/ themselves
    3/ for
    4/ poverty and delightful Country
    To everyone do not spend 3017 pension which will be the same all at once

  51. Norma
    November 8, 2017 - 6:33 am

    Again all talk and no action, exactly what is going on about our pensions?
    Letter and emails to MP’s are not working and is a waste of time and effort.
    We need to educate the British public about the facts, that the Government is sending money to countries that do not need it and that British pensioners are living in poverty not only in the UK but around the world because of this discrimination. Pensioners that have returned to the UK from South Africa have informed me that the people and pensioners whom they speak too about this are shocked as they had no idea. Even a Lord who is in the house of Lords knew nothing about this frozen pension. Newspaper articles are not read by all and sundry, the majority of voters do not read a newspaper, so why do we use them?
    Rather use Social media to get the word out. It is time to change the tactics to alert the UK voters what is going on with their money, and what will happen to their pension contributions if they choose to live in a frozen country.

  52. Robin Davidson
    November 9, 2017 - 2:19 pm

    Hi, it is frustrating to say the least but I do believe that MPs and Lords are becoming more aware of this issue through the various campaigns. Despite the standard email / letters replies we get, on a personal level, I think the MPs see the injustice but largely do as TM tells them to do. Earlier in 2017 one of the CABP reps was called to a meeting with a government official on this subject and flew over from Canada but as he arrived for the meeting the GE was called and the meeting was cancelled – what would he have been told? would the government have made some concession? who knows but the message is getting through and we will get there. Thanks to all those who take action and the members of the APPG and various international pressure groups. Justice will prevail. Every day I wake I hope to see that the DUP have pulled their confidence and supply support from TM to force a GE that would, I believe, see JC in #10 and as a strong supporter etc. that would be the end of this and we can move on to other issues like vote for life!

  53. Andy Robertson-Fox
    November 16, 2017 - 6:36 pm

    Good to see some new members have joined the Group and thank you for recognising the injustice of the frozen pension scandal and the need to bring world wide parity with index linking.

  54. Jeff Chipps
    November 17, 2017 - 3:49 am

    I’ll echo Andy Robertson-Fox’s words and also welcome the new members. Thanks must also go to the long standing members of the APPG for their continuing work to free the world of this punishing policy. Hopefully all your work will pay off and every contributor of NI will get what they paid for – an indexed pension!

  55. Robin Davidson
    November 20, 2017 - 12:37 pm

    I guess it would be too easy to suggest that an amendment be made to the budget bill when that bill is debated in the coming couple of weeks? It seems clear that a majority of MP’s are in favour of the same uprating for all. I imagine there will be at least a few lines about pensions that an amendment could be tagged onto?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published / Required fields are marked *