In the 2011 Autumn statement by the Chancellor George Osborne he announced that retirement will be going up to 67. Whilst some may have thought this was bad and it was wrong I think most thought this was OK, as it was only 2 extra years plus people are living longer and also people like to go to work.
However, it is widely expected that the retirement age will go up again today in the Autumn Statement by the Chancellor George Osborne. It is again expect to raised to the age of 70 years of age.
My question would be are we now expected to accepted the retirement age to raise ever 2 years under this Chancellor? If so why are NI not reducing for people. I say this last part because the pension will be the same , if not less and if you are working 5 yrs longer you will only get the same, so in reality people have longer to pay in which should mean lower NI contributions.
Just to show the diversity of problems with a fixed retirement age apparently vanishing over the horizon...
ReplyDeleteThere are parts of the country where current life expectancy rates means that some people will not get a retirement.
It is still the case that people of 50+ who are made redundant struggle to find a new job and face a new poverty gap until they reach retirement age.
There are some occupations were in it is unrealistic to expect people to work this extended time and the chances of redeployment are limited. I have a great deal of sympathy with firemen: if they have an "occupational" pension should retirement arrangements reflect the physical demands of their job?
We need to be far cleverer in respect of retirement age. As with company and private pensions, there should be some flexibility that allows people to retire "early" with a reduced pension in the first few years.
Just give yourself a non job like Cllr Paul Kenny in the cabinet, what's he picking up Cllr Fairhurst another £6k? he must be laughing his socks off.
ReplyDelete