Pensions minister Torsten Bell has said the government may need to rethink forthcoming state pension age hikes due to slowing life expectancy.
This is madness. How are people supposed to plan for retirement, when they don’t know how old they’ll be when the state pension kicks in?
The turmoil has dragged on for 30 years, with one Pension Act after another sowing confusion. Now there’s no end in sight.
It all started with the Pensions Act 1995. This lifted the state pension age for women from 60 to 65 between 2010 and 2020, to bring it into line with men.
Waspi women are still furious about that one.
There was another Pensions Act in 2007 that I won’t bore you with, while the Pensions Act 2011 brought forward the state pension age increase to 66 to 2020, for both men and women.
The Pensions Act 2014 brought forward the next state pension age hike too. It will rise to 67 between 2026 and 2028.
Then to 68 between 2044 and 2046.
Unless it doesn’t.
In March 2017, John Cridland produced an independent report into the subject.
He said the state pension age should rise to 68 between 2037 and 2039. Seven years earlier than currently planned.
Cridland then added a nasty kicker: If additional savings are needed, the state pension triple lock should be withdrawn in the next Parliament.
Which is now this Parliament.
Given that both the Conservative and Labour went into last year’s election pledging to protect the triple lock, that’s not going to happen.
Unless it does.
Chancellor Rachel Reeves is desperately short of cash.
She’s upsetting her own party’s core supporters by attacking benefits, to meet her fiscal rules and boost military spending to counter Vladimir Putin.
She could just as easily turn her attentions to the state pension triple lock.
We just don’t know. Neither does the DWP, which is ultimately responsible for setting the future state pension age.
What a mess.
The picture has been further complicated by the pandemic, which hit life expectancy.
How can the government justify hiking the state pension age if we’re dying younger?
Whatever the DWP eventually decides, one group will be the losers. Workers on lower incomes. Especially those who do physical, manual jobs.
Many will struggle to work on into their late 60s. Their bodies won’t take it.
Repeatedly hiking the state pension age is pushing their retirement further and further away.
Some will die before they get there. Or soon afterwards.
In a cruel twist, many will have started work earlier, after leaving school at 16 with few qualifications.
They could have paid more than 40 years of national insurance (NI) contributions by the time they hit state pension age. And get little in return because they won’t live as long.
By contrast, better paid graduate workers can expect to live for 15 or 20 years after hitting state pension age.
The DWP can’t keep hiking the state pension age. It’s just not fair on manual workers.
The danger is that politicians will then listen to Cridland, and target the triple lock instead.
