Thank you, Sir Peter, for your continued support for the 550,000 UK expat pensioners who suffer the indignity of a frozen State Retirement Pension.
I am sure you are aware that within the last two weeks, and in reply to Baroness Floella Benjamin, the government minister Lord David Freud admitted, "bluntly it is about money" In other words all the references he and others in the past had made to honouring the European Convention on Human Rights enshrined in EU law, no bi-lateral agreements, long standing government policy and the rest are really nothing but red herrings.
As Lord Browne of Ladyton said in the Lords when discussing the Pensions Act 2014 - albeit in not so many words - "to do it now (uprate pensions) would raise the question of why we have not done it before"; or another way - quite simply we would lose face!
As has been pointed out by Jeff Chipps to uprate in Bedfordshire but not in Berkshire would clearly be ludicrous but is it not also ludicrous to uprate on one side of the street in, say, Derby Line because it is in the USA but not the other as it is in Canada?
Even though you use the phrase "treated differently" I use the word "discrimination" - discrimination does not have to be illegal even if morally unjust - and is contrary to the spirit and intention of the Commonwealth Charter which opposes discrimination on any grounds.
So the government, through Lord Freud, now admits it is about money. May I conclude with the words of Juliane Kokott, Judge Advocate General at the European Courts of Justice who said, "It must be realised that budgetary constraints are not justification for discrimination".
My pension is not frozen but, like you, Sir Peter, I campaign on a matter of fairness and justice as a matter of principle.
Andy Robertson-Fox
Posted on 20 Mar 2015 9:06 am
Thank you, Sir Peter, for your continued support for the 550,000 UK expat pensioners who suffer the indignity of a frozen State Retirement Pension.
I am sure you are aware that within the last two weeks, and in reply to Baroness Floella Benjamin, the government minister Lord David Freud admitted, "bluntly it is about money" In other words all the references he and others in the past had made to honouring the European Convention on Human Rights enshrined in EU law, no bi-lateral agreements, long standing government policy and the rest are really nothing but red herrings.
As Lord Browne of Ladyton said in the Lords when discussing the Pensions Act 2014 - albeit in not so many words - "to do it now (uprate pensions) would raise the question of why we have not done it before"; or another way - quite simply we would lose face!
As has been pointed out by Jeff Chipps to uprate in Bedfordshire but not in Berkshire would clearly be ludicrous but is it not also ludicrous to uprate on one side of the street in, say, Derby Line because it is in the USA but not the other as it is in Canada?
Even though you use the phrase "treated differently" I use the word "discrimination" - discrimination does not have to be illegal even if morally unjust - and is contrary to the spirit and intention of the Commonwealth Charter which opposes discrimination on any grounds.
So the government, through Lord Freud, now admits it is about money. May I conclude with the words of Juliane Kokott, Judge Advocate General at the European Courts of Justice who said, "It must be realised that budgetary constraints are not justification for discrimination".
My pension is not frozen but, like you, Sir Peter, I campaign on a matter of fairness and justice as a matter of principle.