Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
AvidFan

Coucil Tax Rises To Pay For Public Sector Pensions

Recommended Posts

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/tax/council/a..._id=82&ct=5

Council tax may rise to plug pensions gap

Kirsty Walker, Daily Mail

2 August 2009

Council tax may have to rise under controversial plans to plug the black hole in public sector pensions.

Bob Holloway, who runs the pension scheme for local government workers, has warned the gold-plated final salary schemes are no longer sustainable because people are 'refusing to die'.

Local authorities are facing a £50billion shortfall in their pension pots after recklessly investing taxpayers' money in shares and hedge funds.

The respected Public Service Journal reported that officials are considering a number of ways to tackle the deficit, including raising council tax.

They are also looking at increasing employee contributions, raising the retirement age or cutting public services.

Another proposal could see public servants receive pensions based on career-average earnings rather than final salaries.

Mr Holloway said reform was urgently need to tackle concerns about a 'pensions apartheid' between state and private sector workers. He said: 'The LGPS is under threat. Something has to happen - things may even happen before a general election.

'There will need to be something more major than a sticking plaster. Unfortunately, people are refusing to die.'

City accountants PricewaterhouseCoopers say council tax would need to rise by £2,000 per household to plug the gap.

A spokesman for the department for Communities & Local Government said: 'No changes have been proposed. There is simply an informal consultation going on with scheme administrators.'

Edited by AvidFan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Public sector pensions face radical reform

Thursday, July 30, 2009

Changes will have to be made to unsustainable public sector pensions in order to appease private sector workers with less generous schemes and taxpayers who perceive "a pensions apartheid to be getting bigger", a senior government official has revealed, writes Dean Carroll.

Among the radical options for reform being debated by experts are increased employee contributions and raised retirement ages, public service cuts, or council tax rises to pay for public sector pension scheme shortfalls.

Bob Holloway, who manages the Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS) at the Department of Communities and Local Government, told delegates at the CIPFA conference in Manchester that less drastic reforms could include higher and lower membership bands. It would mean those earning more than £75,000 would pay a higher level of contributions while a new lower band might attract less well-paid staff who had opted out of the LGPS. Another option could mean public servants receiving pensions based only on career-average earnings rather than their final salaries.

"The LGPS is under threat, something has to happen – things may even happen before a general election," Holloway said. "If MPs' very generous pensions change, as has been indicated, then other public sector schemes may well receive some pain as well. There will need to be something more major than a sticking plaster. Unfortunately, people are refusing to die."

.......

Further:

http://www.publicservice.co.uk/feature_story.asp?id=12342

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny I first heard the phrase pensions apartheid used by Digby Jones and thought it didnt sound natural.

It sounds like a phrase a PR expert has come up with.

And now 2 articles using the same phrase.

Spooky.

The logic seems to be because private sector workers have been mugged of their pensions it is only fair

that public sector workers must also be robbed of their pensions.

Following that logic if I lose my arm in an accident that everyone else must have their arm amputated.

Its only fair.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Funny I first heard the phrase pensions apartheid used by Digby Jones and thought it didnt sound natural.

It sounds like a phrase a PR expert has come up with.

And now 2 articles using the same phrase.

Spooky.

The logic seems to be because private sector workers have been mugged of their pensions it is only fair

that public sector workers must also be robbed of their pensions.

Following that logic if I lose my arm in an accident that everyone else must have their arm amputated.

Its only fair.

Robbers always have robbery on their agenda.

Of course, no shortage of cash to bail out the City.

BTW the Civil Service has already started moving over to Career Average Salary and Stake Holder pensions for staff.

They have also announced changes to the Civil Service compensation scheme that means early retirement is no longer going to be an option for those facing early severance. They will be getting a cash limited redundancy payoff instead. Hypocritically and mendaciously they intend to restrict the redundancy payouts to people approaching pension age to take account of the 'pensions' that they will be getting. Apparently they will be applying this 'pension' claw back to civil servants who are not even members of the Civil Service Pension Scheme.

Edited by stenosis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Funny I first heard the phrase pensions apartheid used by Digby Jones and thought it didnt sound natural.

It sounds like a phrase a PR expert has come up with.

And now 2 articles using the same phrase.

Spooky.

The logic seems to be because private sector workers have been mugged of their pensions it is only fair

that public sector workers must also be robbed of their pensions.

Following that logic if I lose my arm in an accident that everyone else must have their arm amputated.

Its only fair.

Not quite. I think its more a case of, "I am a private sector worker and I dont think its right that I pay for the pension you were promised by those undemocratically given the right to promise you that pension. My pension is forked and I no longer feel the motivation to top up yours for you".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not quite. I think its more a case of, "I am a private sector worker and I dont think its right that I pay for the pension you were promised by those undemocratically given the right to promise you that pension. My pension is forked and I no longer feel the motivation to top up yours for you".

Why did private sector workers let their pensions be taken from them without a fight?

Why did they sit back and let it happen?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sadly the TUC is assuming that we haven't just given 80% of GDP to the bankers, who have already splunked it.

also -

The cost of pensions in payment depends on the pensions already built up by thousands of former public sector staff

is pure 100% rubbish. Theres no money there. It's been spent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

haha that articles hilarious what sanity is there in calculating the affordability of pension schemes based on GDP when Govt spending forms part of GDP, why not just increase pension payments by another 100% as it will have practically no impact on ratio to GDP

and this beauty

"The TUC briefing says that moving to a funded defined contribution pension for public sector staff would cost a huge amount of money and not produce savings for decades. Tax payers would immediately have to pay for all public sector pensions in payment as member and employer contributions would be used to build up the future pensions of current staff. These contributions currently pay for pensions in payment."

Yes far more financially stable to run it as a ponzi scheme rather than actually pay as you go only an organisation like the TUC could highlight such feckwittery as a positive point

Persdonally i have no axe to grind on this as i no longer pay tax to the UK Govt but the public scheme is only remotely fundable if this multi generational bull market of the last 80 year continues, i think its a busted flushfor at least a couple of decades and therefore see this argument as a moot point, they simply wont be honoured

Edited by Tamara De Lempicka

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This story was in Saturday's DT as well.

Seems the only option we have, is a mass suicide outside the Department of Works and Pensions.

Come to think of it, why is the government raising the issue of assisted suicide.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Funny I first heard the phrase pensions apartheid used by Digby Jones and thought it didnt sound natural.

It sounds like a phrase a PR expert has come up with.

And now 2 articles using the same phrase.

Spooky.

The logic seems to be because private sector workers have been mugged of their pensions it is only fair

that public sector workers must also be robbed of their pensions.

Following that logic if I lose my arm in an accident that everyone else must have their arm amputated.

Its only fair.

For something to be stolen it has to exist in the first place.

This isn't stealing from public sector pension pots, this is stopping public sector pension pots stealing from the private citizen. Something that wasn't prevented with the bankers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This story was in Saturday's DT as well.

Seems the only option we have, is a mass suicide outside the Department of Works and Pensions.

Come to think of it, why is the government raising the issue of assisted suicide.

Also if they are proposing putting back the retirement age to 70 to resolve the pension problem how does this

help reducing staff paycosts by natural wastage? They have just an additional 5 years per person to the staff costs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This isn't stealing from public sector pension pots, this is stopping public sector pension pots stealing from the private citizen. Something that wasn't prevented with the bankers.

You mean I am stealing from myself.

I am truly bonkers.

Only one option left for me then, suicide outside the DWP.

Anybody else free Tuesday week at about 10am ?

Edited by DiggerUK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Also if they are proposing putting back the retirement age to 70 to resolve the pension problem how does this

help reducing staff paycosts by natural wastage? They have just an additional 5 years per person to the staff costs.

Better chance of you being dead by the time you reach 70.

Who's for the suicide option?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Also if they are proposing putting back the retirement age to 70 to resolve the pension problem how does this

help reducing staff paycosts by natural wastage? They have just an additional 5 years per person to the staff costs.

yep, id agree with this point, i dont think moving the retirement age will work as the extra 5 years work will offset the shortened lifespan which in 20 years time may have increased further anyway.

The only way to truly solve it is through increasing contributions and more importantly applying the same Inflation Cap that Gordo passed to be to be introduced to private pensions earlier in the year of lower of inflation or 2.5%

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For something to be stolen it has to exist in the first place.

This isn't stealing from public sector pension pots, this is stopping public sector pension pots stealing from the private citizen. Something that wasn't prevented with the bankers.

It did exist in the first place though. Pensions were part of the job remuneration.

If employers in the private sector say sorry but we cant afford to pay for you to go on holiday.

If you take time off for holiday it will be unpaid.

Private sector workers say durrrr OK.

Then the next thing there is a holiday apartheid. Private sector workers say why should public sector workers get paid

holidays? Its not fair.

Its a race to the bottom and the only winners are the employers who by the way are getting very generous pensions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're going to have to stop giving all our money and jobs to Asia.

There is no sensible alternative.

Capital and exchange controls, import tariffs and slash taxes.

Job done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We're going to have to stop giving all our money and jobs to Asia.

There is no sensible alternative.

Capital and exchange controls, import tariffs and slash taxes.

Job done.

As the americans found (just before) the civil war - you can't compete with slave labour and have a decent economy and society.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Better chance of you being dead by the time you reach 70.

Who's for the suicide option?

I think thats the idea. Work till you drop dead.

Who said people are working longer anyway?

Middle class people maybe, working class people are not.

They are burnt out and knackered by the age of 65.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think thats the idea. Work till you drop dead.

Who said people are working longer anyway?

Middle class people maybe, working class people are not.

They are burnt out and knackered by the age of 65.

Yes, but my option kills two birds with one stone.

Mass suicide of those reaching retirement frees up jobs for younger people.

They would benefit by us old duffers topping ourselves.

Unemployment would plummet overnight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, but my option kills two birds with one stone.

Mass suicide of those reaching retirement frees up jobs for younger people.

They would benefit by us old duffers topping ourselves.

Unemployment would plummet overnight.

i think your spot on, the old bulldog spirit, tallyho and all that, taking one for the team is the right thing to do, anything else is pure selfishness

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i think your spot on, the old bulldog spirit, tallyho and all that, taking one for the team is the right thing to do, anything else is pure selfishness

Ask not what your country can do for you, ask about assisted suicide.

Patriots, don't you just love 'em

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   289 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.