Sir, For men now in their late fifties, the proposed change to state pension age to 66 in 2016 will punish those who have already accrued more than 40 years’ contribution or will have by the time they reach 65 (“Automatic pensions and retirement at 70 planned”, online, June 24). Most men over 55 would have started work at 16 (or earlier) and few would have gone into higher education. Why not phase in change based on contribution years? Why punish those who have contributed most?
It is also an insult to those who have contributed for the Prime Minister to say he will not take his pension. He does not need it. Those born between 1950 and 1955 are least able to make up deficits. A fairer system should be the goal of this government.
Cathy Havill
Luton, Beds
Sir, The switch from retail prices index (RPI) to CPI (consumer price index) inflation for the indexation of pensions appears innocuous, but will have a severe impact on pensioners’ living standards (Emergency Budget, June 23). If RPI exceeds CPI by 1 per cent a year, a public service pensioner retiring with a £5,000 pension will lose more than £22,000 over the course of a 25-year retirement. Those with additional state pensions, such as Serps, will be similarly affected.
Advertisement
Philip Hammond, MP, the then Conservative Treasury spokesperson, gave assurances before the election (in a letter to the Civil Service Pensioners’ Alliance in April) that the Conservative Party had “no plans to change the current index-linking of pensions in payment”. This promise has not lasted two months before being broken.
Andrew Morris
General Secretary, Public Service Pensioners’ Council