Forces Widows Pension Change Of Heart

[mikey4444]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-29956894

According to Defence Secretary Michael Fallon, his government was putting right an issue that had caused "upset and disappointment for many years".

I welcome this move, as I expect most people will do but am I being a tad cynical by thinking that this announcement is being made very close to an Election ? After all, the Tories could have done this just after they won power back in the summer of 2010.

By the way, this extra pension provision will cost the exchequer just £120M a year, hardly a fortune when compared to total expenditure.

[-Talbot-]

About time too



"but am I being a tad cynical by thinking that this announcement is being made very close to an Election ?"


Who cares!

[sandyRoe]

It is good news.
I would give as much weight to any Tory claim that this had nothing to do with the election as I would to the Chancellor's claim that the UK won't have to pay that £1.7 billion to Brussels.

[mikey4444]

Its undoubtedly good news, but I notice that it isn't being backdated before 1973, if I am reading the BBC link correctly ?

[Sqad]

Why is it good news?

The survivor pension is given to maintain financial stability to the survivor, usually the widow. If she marries again or co- habits, then the responsibility then should fall on the new OH and motnthe tax payer.
The same applies to the Nhs pension.

Quite a price we pay to keep the public sector workers "sweat."

[mikey4444]

Good Morning Sqad !

I seem to remember that we on AB, have discussed this issue of Widows pensions on AB before. I'm fairly sure that the practise of taking away a widows pension if she remarries is fairly widespread, and is not confined to service personnel, but I might be wrong there.

But this is such a modest sum of money, that the change is well overdue. Our Armed Forces have paid an awful toll in serving their country, that I think its only right that their dependents are not made to suffer.

[sandyRoe]

Why good news? It is better to marry than to burn. This means young widows won't be forced to choose between an unnatural celibate life or one of sin. :-)

[Sqad]

Good morning mikey.

Suffer?...depends wHo they re-marry.

No, I don' so it.

[mikey4444]

sandy...it appears that at present, widows lose their pension if they remarry or co-habit. But does anyone "live in sin" anymore in Britain today ? My Mother thought so and she went to her grave without changing her mind on that issue !

[sandyRoe]

If more people had an awareness of sin, and didn't stray too far from the path of righteousness, there might be a lot less pain in the world.

[Svejk]

/// After all, the Tories could have done this just after they won power back in the summer of 2010.///
But Labour couldn't in 13 years? lol.

[mikey4444]

Forgive me Father, for I have sinned ...although not as much as I would have liked to !

[Peter Pedant]

You are not being more cynical than normal

but surely your pinko wet liberal bleeding heart can pay tribute to this move ?
you gonna pay either way

[Peter Pedant]

.//Forgive me Father, for I have sinned ...although not as much as I would have liked to //

echoes you atheist Augustine of Hippos (St) AD 400 when he uttered his famous prayer, "Grant me chastity and continence, but not yet.".

[sandyRoe]

I think the secret of being a successful sinner is all in the timing. If only we could know when we were going we could live as we liked sure in the knowledge that our deathbed repentance would wash away all past transgressions.

[youngmafbog]

No they couldnt pay it when they got in, labour had spent it all.

[mikey4444]

PP...( 08:49)...I have already welcomed this move, as you will see from my OP at the top of the page. Also, I have supported calls for this change when it has been discussed on AB in the past.

Now I must go to work, or the mortgage won't be paid this month !

[New Judge]

"The survivor pension is given to maintain financial stability to the survivor, usually the widow."

This is the problem with many aspects of "government" pensions, sqad. They treat the payments like benefits or charity which must align with the recipients needs. I have a private pension and if I should predecease my wife she retains 60% of it until she dies. That's the deal I signed up to when I began to pay for it. There are no conditions on this and what she does after I die does not affect that entitlement. She won't particularly need the money but there is no earthly reason why a widow remarrying should influence how much pension she receives. Those payments (and the premiums paid to gain them) should be calculated just on the usual actuarial bases (average life expectancy, etc.).

The government gets away with murder with some of the conditions it imposes on the pensions for which it is responsible. Particularly iniquitous is the freezing of State pensions for people leaving the UK when they choose to live in countries which "do not have reciprocal arrangements". There is no rational reason for it other than to deprive people of payments which most of them have funded throughout their working life. Meantime it lavishes payments at many times the State pension rate on many waifs and strays who turn up on these shores.

And yes, Mikey, I imagine this move has been carefully timed to occur in the beginning of the run up to next year's election. Governments of all persuasions lavish taxpayers' money (or at least promise to do so) on the electorate at such times.

[sandyRoe]

Will this proposal also help widows of police officers?

[THECORBYLOON]

MIKEY, there are different schemes for those widowed before April 1973 or after April 2005. The campaigners are not wanting arrears to be paid but they want entitlement backdated so that if the marriage or co-habitation ends, the pension can be re-instated.