Pensions and independence

[lichtgilphead]

2 minutes ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

I’ll leave DMCs to respond authoritatively but I would surmise that Scotland, as part of the UK, benefitted from the workers contributions to the national government and therefore should take on the pension paying liability whereas France received no benefit from the workers contributions and therefore has no liability.

No knowledge but just trying to use some common sense!!

How will Scotland have benefited from my brother's NI contributions in London? He would get a full UK pension (with increases) if he retired to France, but according to DMCs would not get a UK pension if he retired in Scotland. You have a strange idea of common sense!

 

[Dawson Park Boy]

2 hours ago, lichtgilphead said:

How will Scotland have benefited from my brother's NI contributions in London? He would get a full UK pension (with increases) if he retired to France, but according to DMCs would not get a UK pension if he retired in Scotland. You have a strange idea of common sense!

 

Scotland did benefit as part of the UK.

[lichtgilphead]

7 minutes ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

Scotland did benefit as part of the UK.

He is considered to be an English taxpayer - his tax code does not start with "S".

Why would he get a full UK pension if he retired in England, Wales or France, but he would lose it by returning to iScotland?

[SandyCromarty]

3 hours ago, lichtgilphead said:

Please provide some links to credible sources to back up your claim.

The only UK Government statement I recall dates from 2014, when they admitted that pension entitlements would be unaffected by a yes vote.

If the post-indy Scotgov are responsible for funding & paying the pensions of all qualifying Scottish-domiciled citizens after that date, how could the UK Government make that claim? If it became a ScotGov responsibility on Indy Day, surely they would have said "That's a matter for a future ScotGov", wouldn't they.

Finally, can you please attempt to answer the question I asked in my previous post (and previously). Here it is again:

How would UK pension entitlement be different for someone who had worked in the UK and retired to France, and a similar person who retired to iScotland, assuming (of course) that the rUK did not change the eligibility rules in a petty & discriminatory manner?

I asked him already about this and he responded with hearsay and rumours which i strongly suspect were contrived to suit his argument.

How about the Polish guy working in the uk paying his taxes and NI contributions and then retires to Poland and then, as in line the UK government law I provided,  is legally entitled to  a uk pension, the same would apply to Scots on Independence, unfortunately this does not suit the unionist argument who prefer to scaremonger with hearsay and no facts.

[SandyCromarty]

21 hours ago, DMCs said:

The statements from UK government and DWP pension sources have been very clear on this that new pensions would automatically become the responsibility of the Scottish state after independence. I suspect it's quite likely what we are arguing about will be tested within 10-20 years and I believe I will be proven correct. 

Could an independent Scottish state afford the current state pension? Maybe but it would require at least one of three things to happen for it affordable long term as Scotland has the oldest population of any of the UK nations and is aging quickest.

1 - strong above average economic growth and for pensions to not be increased above the triple lock.

2 - the aging effect to be slowed or reversed. More immigration would help a lot here but it's a bit of a plaster temporary fix that doesn't solve the problem correctly. What we need is higher birth rates and especially for emigration to be reduced (through incentives rather than any Berlin Wall type coercion I hope) as that could be a big issue for an independent Scotland. For birth rates a big problem is our housing market. 

3 - Increasing taxes to pay for increasing state pension costs. I believe this would be a terrible policy but it is one way of dealing with it.

What fuckin statements, give us a clear legal reference instead of nonsensical rumours and hearsay which you are so dependent upon.

Gordon Brown got the whole pension scenerio so very wrong.

Explain how you think that the uk legality of the Polish worker pensions rights is wrong and would not apply to Scots.

Then tell me in all honesty what you really think of Scottish Independence, because that's the real issue isn't it?

 

Edited April 11, 2021 by SandyCromarty

[lichtgilphead]

6 hours ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

I’ll leave DMCs to respond authoritatively with some more unsubstantiated bollocks

Your hero appears to be very quiet...

I have sourced evidence that supports my contention that my view is correct. I'm ready to post it (with links & page references)

I wonder how llong it will be before @DMCs replies to my request for his evidence?

[DMCs]

12 hours ago, lichtgilphead said:

Your hero appears to be very quiet...

I have sourced evidence that supports my contention that my view is correct. I'm ready to post it (with links & page references)

I wonder how llong it will be before @DMCs replies to my request for his evidence?

Alright pal I needed some time to gather the evidence.

In 2013 the SNP Scottish Government said that after independence the Scottish government would take full control of all pensions both current and future. This is actually more than what I've been arguing! I've attached the report.

In 2016 you can see that the coalition government pensions minister confirmed what I was saying in this quote:

"In the event of a yes vote there would be negotiations between the UK Government and the Scottish Government, in line with the Edinburgh Agreement. One area these negotiations would need to focus on is who would take on the liabilities associated with paying the state pension. While there are to be no pre-negotiations, I would think the Scottish people would expect their Government to take on full responsibility for paying pensions to people in Scotland including where liabilities had arisen before independence. Similarly people in the rest of the UK would not be expecting to guarantee or underwrite the pensions of those living in what would then have become a separate country. The security and sustainability of pensions being paid to people in Scotland would, therefore, depend on the ability of Scottish tax payers to fund them."

Now that isn't as strong as the 2013 promise of the SNP as it does say subject to negotiations. Link for that is here - http://data.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/committeeevidence.svc/evidencedocument/scottish-affairs-committee/the-referendum-on-separation-for-scotland/written/10449.html

Also see pages 11-14 of the attached 2014 DWP report.

Pensions in an Independent Scotland.pdf scotland-analysis-work-and-pensions.pdf

[DMCs]

13 hours ago, SandyCromarty said:

Then tell in all honesty what you really think of Scottish Independence, because that's the real issue isn't it?

I'm in an interesting position because I voted no in 2014 and I'm still against independence for a number of reasons relating to family and finances. However I think it's got a greater than a 50% chance of happening within the next decade so my position is that engagement and discussion on what that future state looks like is vital. 

Which is where the pension issue comes in. The last thing we want to do is double the state pension just because someone wanted to get more votes from the elderly. I'd much rather we spent money on something that would have a productive and multiplicative effect on our GDP growth.

[Juanhourjoe]

11 minutes ago, DMCs said:

While there are to be no pre-negotiations, I would think the Scottish people would expect their Government to take on full responsibility for paying pensions to people in Scotland including where liabilities had arisen before independence. Similarly people in the rest of the UK would not be expecting to guarantee or underwrite the pensions of those living in what would then have become a separate country. The security and sustainability of pensions being paid to people in Scotland would, therefore, depend on the ability of Scottish tax payers to fund them."

This quote is just playing to the prejudices of unionists, and Tory supporters in England. Knowing they'd eat it up. And not question how it works with other countries and see that as exactly the same.

On the scotgov document. I'll give you that. However, it was a stupid thing to write, full of contradictions. And pandering to those who believe the SNP will take care of everything better in Scotland.

Both. Are playing politics. And nowhere close to reality.

 

[SandyCromarty]

31 minutes ago, DMCs said:

I'm in an interesting position because I voted no in 2014 and I'm still against independence for a number of reasons relating to family and finances. However I think it's got a greater than a 50% chance of happening within the next decade so my position is that engagement and discussion on what that future state looks like is vital. 

Which is where the pension issue comes in. The last thing we want to do is double the state pension just because someone wanted to get more votes from the elderly. I'd much rather we spent money on something that would have a productive and multiplicative effect on our GDP growth.

With Independence Pensions will be sorted with no adverse effect on the population. The SNP have already addressed the currency issue.

There are many other major issues which will require extensive negotiation and financial wrangling, not least the relocation of the nuclear missile base at Faslane, this will run into Billions for the remaining uk, Scotland will have to pick up some of that bill.

Scots do have a negative outlook at times and the thought of Independence brings out too much negativity to many, there's no doubt there will be a bumpy road but I'd rather that and to be responsible to make our own decisions free from another country's interference.

As I've said many times before the little englander Brexiteers despised Brussels laying down laws and engineered breaking away from the EU with all the drastic consequences that has led to, so why should we put up with another country, with a government we did not vote for passing laws for us.

Are we not capable of running our own country?

[Baxter Parp]

1 hour ago, DMCs said:

 I'd much rather we spent money on something that would have a productive and multiplicative effect on our GDP growth.

What makes you think increasing pensions wouldn't have a productive effect on the economy?

[Dawson Park Boy]

1 hour ago, SandyCromarty said:

With Independence Pensions will be sorted with no adverse effect on the population. The SNP have already addressed the currency issue.

There are many other major issues which will require extensive negotiation and financial wrangling, not least the relocation of the nuclear missile base at Faslane, this will run into Billions for the remaining uk, Scotland will have to pick up some of that bill.

Scots do have a negative outlook at times and the thought of Independence brings out too much negativity to many, there's no doubt there will be a bumpy road but I'd rather that and to be responsible to make our own decisions free from another country's interference.

As I've said many times before the little englander Brexiteers despised Brussels laying down laws and engineered breaking away from the EU with all the drastic consequences that has led to, so why should we put up with another country, with a government we did not vote for passing laws for us.

Are we not capable of running our own country?

Sandy, of course you’re capable of running your own country.

You and the nationalists just need to be totally honest with the electorate about the outlook and how things like currency, pensions, GDP, austerity will affect their lives. The Andrew Wilson report did try to do that and the result wasn’t great.

However, it just depends how important sovereignty is to you.  Obviously, to yourself it is everything, but to others it might not.

It is very similar to Brexit. The experts mostly said it was a bad idea but sovereignty was the clincher. Yes, there are problems, but it is interesting to see that trade flows with the EU are bouncing back quite strongly. The UK public took the decision and the consequences.  Whenever and, if, the referendum happens, then the Scottish public will just need to weigh up the pros and cons and make their judgement.

[DMCs]

1 hour ago, SandyCromarty said:

With Independence Pensions will be sorted with no adverse effect on the population. The SNP have already addressed the currency issue.

The currency issue shows a big problem with the SNP's approach to laying out the post independence plans. The only reason they said for so long that we would use pound sterling after independence was because it polled well. That's despite it being clearly a terrible idea! Essentially their instinct is following the polls rather than to be bold.

43 minutes ago, Baxter Parp said:

What makes you think increasing pensions wouldn't have a productive effect on the economy?

Compared to improving infrastructure or building housing? It's clear as day which is preferable there and neither is it needed.

Ultimately pension policy should be focused on the much bigger issue that young people aren't saving enough. "How do we get young people to save more?" should be the policy question. What we could do is lower their crazy housing costs by building loads of houses and liberalising planning laws. A serious plan for Scottish independence would want Edinburgh to be at least 3 times the size it is.

[Baxter Parp]

2 minutes ago, DMCs said:

Compared to improving infrastructure or building housing? It's clear as day which is preferable there and neither is it needed.

Ok, let's compare increasing pensions to investing in infrastructure or housing, what's the numbers?

[peternapper]

Am looking forward to picking up my first state pension payment this coming week, hopefully followed asap by our country gaining independence & no longer being ruled by a corrupt government that has no interest in our well being 

[Suspect Device]

Has this link already been posted?

Scotland referendum 2014: the impact of independence on pensions - UK Parliament

 

 

[DMCs]

1 hour ago, Baxter Parp said:

Ok, let's compare increasing pensions to investing in infrastructure or housing, what's the numbers?

I mean that's a very complex analysis but since there are about 1m pensioners in Scotland it's unlikely that any increase would be huge per pensioner so not enough for them to start businesses and the like. So the extra money would only really be spent in the consumer economy. Which is the same as if that money was given to single parents or school leavers who tend to need the extra money more than pensioners do.

Fixing the housing market in Edinburgh would go a long way to increasing it's growth as it's a city that many in the whole UK and beyond have a desire to live in. I mean two of my sisters recently bought a flat each in Edinburgh while I bought in East Renfrewshire. The difference in size and quality of what I got compared to them despite not paying much more is staggering.

[SandyCromarty]

4 hours ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

Sandy, of course you’re capable of running your own country.

You and the nationalists just need to be totally honest with the electorate about the outlook and how things like currency, pensions, GDP, austerity will affect their lives. The Andrew Wilson report did try to do that and the result wasn’t great.

However, it just depends how important sovereignty is to you.  Obviously, to yourself it is everything, but to others it might not.

It is very similar to Brexit. The experts mostly said it was a bad idea but sovereignty was the clincher. Yes, there are problems, but it is interesting to see that trade flows with the EU are bouncing back quite strongly. The UK public took the decision and the consequences.  Whenever and, if, the referendum happens, then the Scottish public will just need to weigh up the pros and cons and make their judgement.

At what cost? A BBC report last week stated that the cost of one single pallet to Northern Irelland is now costing £50 - £350 more.

Edited April 11, 2021 by SandyCromarty

[SandyCromarty]

3 hours ago, DMCs said:

The currency issue shows a big problem with the SNP's approach to laying out the post independence plans. The only reason they said for so long that we would use pound sterling after independence was because it polled well. That's despite it being clearly a terrible idea! Essentially their instinct is following the polls rather than to be bold.

Compared to improving infrastructure or building housing? It's clear as day which is preferable there and neither is it needed.

Ultimately pension policy should be focused on the much bigger issue that young people aren't saving enough. "How do we get young people to save more?" should be the policy question. What we could do is lower their crazy housing costs by building loads of houses and liberalising planning laws. A serious plan for Scottish independence would want Edinburgh to be at least 3 times the size it is.

On Indepndence Scottish currency will not be a pound sterling nor tied to it, but it may well be called a Scottish pound standing on it's own, the SNP have already stated that, as I've said so many times that is why the SNP set up The Scottish National Investment Bank last November, it is the SNP's intention to rejoin the EU and one major requirement as per the Copenhagen Criteria is that a country applying to join the EU cannot have it's currency tied to another non EU member country's currency.

That is why Lithuania discontinued the Russian Rouble and printed it's own currency.

Anyway this all going round in circles and I'm finished with it, pensions and now currency have now been discussed exhaustively.

The SNP have it all in hand, meanwhile unionists can continue with the scaremongering, end of.

[lichtgilphead]

7 hours ago, DMCs said:

Alright pal I needed some time to gather the evidence.

In 2013 the SNP Scottish Government said that after independence the Scottish government would take full control of all pensions both current and future. This is actually more than what I've been arguing! I've attached the report.

In 2016 you can see that the coalition government pensions minister confirmed what I was saying in this quote:

"In the event of a yes vote there would be negotiations between the UK Government and the Scottish Government, in line with the Edinburgh Agreement. One area these negotiations would need to focus on is who would take on the liabilities associated with paying the state pension. While there are to be no pre-negotiations, I would think the Scottish people would expect their Government to take on full responsibility for paying pensions to people in Scotland including where liabilities had arisen before independence. Similarly people in the rest of the UK would not be expecting to guarantee or underwrite the pensions of those living in what would then have become a separate country. The security and sustainability of pensions being paid to people in Scotland would, therefore, depend on the ability of Scottish tax payers to fund them."

Now that isn't as strong as the 2013 promise of the SNP as it does say subject to negotiations. Link for that is here - http://data.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/committeeevidence.svc/evidencedocument/scottish-affairs-committee/the-referendum-on-separation-for-scotland/written/10449.html

Also see pages 11-14 of the attached 2014 DWP report.

Pensions in an Independent Scotland.pdf 1.41 MB · 2 downloads scotland-analysis-work-and-pensions.pdf 983.69 kB · 1 download

In 2013 the SNP Scottish Government said that after independence the Scottish government would take full control of all pensions both current and future.

Yes, they said that they would take responsibility for paying the pensions. That's given. Obviously, should they decide to increase (or decrease) the State Pension, that would be a matter for the Scottish Government.

However, your point does not address who is responsible for funding the existing pension liabilities which have built up during the time that Scotland has been a member of the UK. 

"In the event of a yes vote there would be negotiations between the UK Government and the Scottish Government, in line with the Edinburgh Agreement. One area these negotiations would need to focus on is who would take on the liabilities associated with paying the state pension.

This clearly states that liability for pensions will be subject to negotiations, just as I have said all along. It definitely does not prove that "The statements from UK government and DWP pension sources have been very clear on this that new pensions would automatically become the responsibility of the Scottish state after independence" as you previously claimed.

It is clear that the pension payments will be made by the iScottish Government. What is not clear is what percentage of the existing liabilities of the UK government will be taken on by the iScottish Government. The rest of the UK Minister's statement is just wishful thinking about how he hopes that the negotiations pan out.

From a quick glance at the 135 page document "Pensions in an Independent Scotland", I cannot see any mention of funding existing pension liabilities, which you have already demonstrated will be subject to negotiations. Is there an actual point in including this document, apart from to pad out your so-called evidence?

At least you've directed me to only 4 pages of the 113 page DWP report. I note that page 14 gives a rough figure for the total funded & unfunded public service liabilities both in the UK and in iScotland, but fail to see what relevance this has to a discussion of who will assume responsibility for existing liabilities for the basic state pension?

Much of the rest of these 4 pages relates to the cost of setting up a Scottish Social Security system. It may have escaped your notice, but such a system has been put into place since the document was written and is already making payments to Scottish social security recipients that are not provided elsewhere in the UK.

Maybe I'm just missing the point you are trying to make. Perhaps you could provide exact references to the paragraphs that back up your claim, rather that general references to 100+ page documents?

Accordingly, let me present my evidence.

I would firstly direct you to the "Scotland's Future" document, which can be downloaded here. The last two paragraphs on page 341 state

Agreements will also cover other national assets and institutions
(for example official reserves, the BBC and its archives, and UK
and GB-wide systems for administering welfare and taxation,
wherever located). Scotland’s share of UK assets will be
realised in a combination of ways – through physical assets,
cash transfer and continued use of assets through shared
service agreements.
Discussion will also cover the allocation of liabilities,
including apportionment of the national debt, the current
and future liabilities on public sector pensions, civil nuclear
decommissioning and social security benefits. (my emphasis)

As I have previously stated, if Scotland is to take on a share of the liabilities, it should also take on a share of the assets. The final paragraph of page 341 makes it totally clear that funding of existing & future state pensions is a matter for negotiation. Accordingly, your contention that "The statements from UK government and DWP pension sources have been very clear on this that new pensions would automatically become the responsibility of the Scottish state after independence" is incorrect. 

I would also refer you to the section headed "State Pension Entitlement in an Independent Scotland", beginning on page 144 of Scotland's Future. Whilst it sets out the responsibility to pay the pension, it is silent on the matter of how existing liabilities will be funded.

The first three paragraphs headed "Transfer of Liabilities" on page 347 are also instructive. They start off by (yet again) mentioning that transfer of liabilities will be by "negotiations" and go on to set out the iScottish Government's proposalls relating to public sector & state pension liabilities. These are proposals, no more, no less. They certainally do not suggest that iScotland would "automatically" take responsibility for anything.

I would also refer you to the following sections of the Q&A section of Scotland's Future

146. Will I get the same benefits after independence?

Yes. We plan that, on independence, there will be a transitional period when the Scottish and Westminster Governments will share the administration and delivery of benefits and State Pensions. It is in both countries’ interests that this should continue

Finally, I'll answer the question that you have avoided answering on numerous previous occasions. 

How would UK pension entitlement be different for someone who had worked in the UK and retired to France, and a similar person who retired to iScotland, assuming (of course) that the rUK did not change the eligibility rules in a petty & discriminatory manner?

As I have previously stated, this situation will apply to my brother, who has spent the vast majority of his post-university adult life working in London. If Scotland becomes independent before he retires, he will continue paying rUK National Insurance contributions and will get his rUK state pension in accordance with the legislation in force in rUK on his retiral date. The liability will not transfer to the iScotGov if he chooses to return to iScotland on retiral. (see Q175 on page 430)

Hopefully the information I have provided above will conclude this discussion.