Hutton calls for hike in public sector pension contributions

No he hasn't . He said on BBC news today that all sorts of different things were under consideration including increased contributions . At least , that is what I heard

I hope Hutton recognizes that commitments and undertakings freely made and given in the past should be honoured in full, even if the cost hurts. If it is now perceived that final salary schemes are 'inherently unfair', no one should be penalized for having entered into such an agreement when it was not considered so. And if it was the case that this unfairness was perceived some time ago, those in such schemes cannot be held accountable for the general public's unwillingness to confront the issue in the past.

Civil and public servants in final salary schemes have an abolute right to expect the general public to stump up what they freely agreed to. After all, we don't expect a bank to turn round when interest is due to be paid and decide unilaterally to pay considerably less. It's no good turning round when the pensions are due to be paid and say, "We made a mistake. We shouldn't have agreed to pay you that much." It's too late for that. And it is dishonourable and underhanded. By all means review the current situation and make decisions for the future, but don't break your word to maintain your standard of living. That's a real fear from the way this whole situation is being talked about.

"...have an abolute right to expect the general public to stump up what they freely agreed to."

Well, as a member of the general public, I don't remember freely agreeing to paying for gold plated pensions for an ever increasing army of public servants.

I should also point out that the private sector pensions have been decimated by stealth tax grabs and incompetent regulation.

Furthermore, the government and civil service have a history of imposing retrospective legislation, particularly in the area of taxation.

Funny how the public servants never compained about this sort of thing when private sector pensions were under attack isn't it?

" general public's unwillingness to confront the issue in the past"

We have been banging on about this for years - its just that up until now no-one in power has had the bottle to do anything about it!

"Civil and public servants in final salary schemes have an abolute right to expect the general public to stump up what they freely agreed to"

I assume that this was said in jest as you cannot seriously beleive that we were given any choice in the matter.

Yes Mr Whyte and I hope the Government reconises the inherently unfair way my Equitable Life pension was destroyed.

Somehow I don't recall any support from public sector workers when the last Government shelfed the compensation proposals for Equitable Life pensioners or any outcry when Brown launched his tax grab on private sector personal pensions.

Don't expect any support now Mr Whyte - welcome to the real world.

I am becoming increasingly irritated at Citywire and what it reports. I can read any of this in other news sites so why does this website recycle what every one else is reporting? It is very lazy reporting just to fill space. It is not the stated purpose of this website - to provide advice on making the most of your money. Tell me somebody how the article above is a contribution towards that stated aim.

Peter,

Wake up and smell the coffee. The country's public sector pensions have an almost £900bn deficit. To insist we should continue with the same scheme because not to do so would be ''unfair'' is like denying the Titanic is still seaworthy as it sinks...

Stop whinging.

"Don't expect any support now Mr Whyte - welcome to the real world."

I am not seeking your support, Mr WIlliams. I am not a civil servant, though I was for a brief period last century. I have both public and private pensions. I am extremely concerned that none of them will provide a satisfactory level of income. I sympathize entirely with your over Equitable Life. No recent government has dealt with this whole area on our behalf with fairness at all.

Isn't it interesting how many people have been brainwashed into the mindset that says "he's got it, I haven't so take it away from him".

I thought that those in private sector schemes wanted to get lower pensions....otherwise, why didn't they do something about the Brown pension purges a few years ago. Or is it that they lacked the sense to see what was happening and the spine to do something about it?

"Well, as a member of the general public, I don't remember freely agreeing to paying for gold plated pensions for an ever increasing army of public servants."

"PensionMan", do you not live in the same democracy I live in? We all agreed to it implicitly through the democratic process. If we don't like the policies being implemented we can vote for MPs who stand for better ones. We can also lobby our MPs and government ministers to let them know what we think of their policies. If we think there's a better policy then we need to tell the ministers about it. They're certainly not going to consider it if you don't tell them.

It's time we all woke up to the fact that we got the government we voted for and the policies we voted for. We can't cherry pick the policies we like and complain about the ones we don't. Democracy doesn't work like that. If we feel agrieved we use the processes open to us. Of course, the alternative is to follow the Beloved Leader, North Korean style. I'm not suggesting for one moment that either you or I want that. Maybe it's time we all stopped leaving all the decisions to the "professionals" and let our MPs and ministers know what we all really think.

"Or is it that they lacked the sense to see what was happening and the spine to do something about it?"

And exactly what could we have done about it? Many of us dont have Unions to fight our corner.

Its amazing that the only time those in the public sector seem to give a monkeys is when it affects them directly. Private sector pensions have been decimated over recent years and I have heard no support from civil servants / government etc.

"I assume that this was said in jest as you cannot seriously beleive that we were given any choice in the matter." (PensionMan)

I wasn't entirely being earnest about that. I do live in the real world, and realise that everyone is going to have to reduce their standard of living. However, most of the discussion about this ignores the moral principles involved. No longer is a man's (or a woman's) word their bond. People are prepared to change things without consideration of morals or ethics.

"nik" stated it well: "Isn't it interesting how many people have been brainwashed into the mindset that says "he's got it, I haven't so take it away from him"." That's precisely how it seems to me. And I can't see that if the situation were reversed, it would be any different.

I do realise that something radical needs to be done (I'm an accountant, so I ought to have some financial sense). What concerns me is that morals and ethics and fairness and so on are treated as luxuries. In a time of economic restraint they can cheerfully be abandoned. That is extremely dangerous. If we need them, and I believe that we do, then we need them more especially at a time like this. If we abandon them now, we will make an even bigger mess of things.

I'm glad that my posting has stimulated a lively response. I just hope that the solutions that we implement as a society will be ones that we can be justly proud of in years to come.

We have never agreed and certainly freely agreed to these absurd public sector pension arrangements unless I have missed the opportunity to have my say / vote ?,They are a disgrace,if councils and civil servants were in the real business / private sector world they would be bankrupt now !!.

The Goverment unlike the last needs to get to grips with this issue once and for all, infact we did not need a Hutton report to confirm these pension arrangements are just not acceptable or affordable !!,there needs to be a firm hand taken, as usual the unions threaten strike action, fine take them on !!,THE PUBLIC SECTOR MUST NOT HAVE BETTER PENSION BENEFITS THAN THE PRIVATE SECTOR, the public sector need urgently to brought into the real world, most private sector UK companies no longer have final salary schemes.

so why should the taxpayer pay for the public sector still have them !!.

Being a member of a trade union is usually a matter of choice, unless you are a lawyer, director or or work in HR.....in which case their unions are not only very effective in protecting their interests, they have convinced everyone that unions are bad for everybody else and that their "professional associations" aren't unions.

Lot's of interesting stuff here.

"nik" stated "Isn't it interesting how many people have been brainwashed into the mindset that says "he's got it, I haven't so take it away from him"."" Absolutely! I have my hard-earned pay, the taxman takes a significant proportion to bolster the public sector pension scheme. Strangely, their tax contributes only a minimal amount to my pension. Who wants to take from whom, Nik?

Peter Whyte says: "It's time we all woke up to the fact that we got the government we voted for and the policies we voted for. We can't cherry pick the policies we like and complain about the ones we don't. Democracy doesn't work like that."

I assume then, Peter, that if this government DOES decide to change the pension rules, you will concede that they did it on your behalf - and not complain.

I think what Hutton actually said was that public sector pensions which had already been earned or accrued would not be removed. That would be probably be illegal anyway.

But in respect of the portion of someone's public sector pension still to be earned, we absolutely have to get these reduced towards the level of those available in the private sector, and affordable to the taxpaper.

So if a person had already worked for twenty years but has another twenty years ahead of you to work, their pension when paid would be half on the current system, based on today's salary adjusted by the RPI inflation index; and the other half based on whatever lesser system is proposed [average earnings?, higher contributions?, upper limits? and subject to CPI, not RPI, indexing?].

If any public employee does not like that, let him [or her] leave, get a job in the real world and try to find a better salary and benefits. There would still be plenty of qualified applicants for the vacancies created!

In reality, of course, we all pay for each other's pension. Everything that we buy or service that we pay for will involve a contribution to the pension of the people involved. Perhaps we should have all invoices, whether from the public or private sector, include a "employee pensions" charge so that customers can choose to contribute....or not to the pensions of those employed by the organisation.

Next time you buy something or use a service (banking springs to mind) ask yourself if you would still contribute if you didn't have to.

More developed nations recognise the importance of employment, especially for the young. Take a look at the retirement ages, working time and public holidays in France and Germany.

We are being led into a cheap labour economy.

The financial viability of, in particular, France and Germany is secure. Ask yourself what make car you drive and who supplies your electricity and water.

All these countries have to do is charge us more and we are not in a position to do anything about it.

The divide and rule policy has successfully distracted people from the real issues and will result in a reduction in quality of life for, especially, the younger generation.