Memorandum by Edwin Boraston
I am taking the liberty of writing to you in
the hope that you and you Committee will consider some of my comments,
meant with good intentions and a deep hope that something can
be done soon to rectify a dreadfully unjust state of affairs relating
to lost pensions.
I am 61 years old and am now in my 46th year
of employment, having paid taxes and national insurance over this
period.
I have also contributed to my final salary pension
fund over and above the minimum because the tax rules would not
allow another source of pension.
I was employed by Dexion Ltd of Hemel Hemstead
Herts, the storage equipment manufacturer.
When the Norwegian owners decided to close the
final salary scheme down, within the law of this country, I remained
in the scheme as I understood that the MFR would ensure that my
pension would be met when I retired at the age of 62 (April 2007).
I was devastated to find that the Norwegian
owners could within the law of this country decide to cease contributions
and cause the fund to be wound up, at the same time as putting
its UK business into receivership.
I visited the OPRA web site to check on information
available and was reassured that the government had in place the
MFR.
I am now advised by the trustees that there
is insufficient funds to pay deferred members even the minimum
guaranteed pension? This means that if I get a pension it will
be less than 10% of the expected pension I was due at 62 in April
2007.
Following the loss of my pension I have been
diagnosed with high blood pressure and I am now on medication.
I have been led to believe that I may qualify
for assistance under the FAS scheme and if I do I will have to
wait until the Dexion scheme is finally wound up or I reach the
age of 65.
When the government introduced the FAS they
patently bought off a great many MPs who were starting to stand
up for the injustice caused.
However MPs have a very high security pension
scheme and I doubt if any MP will be in the position of myself
and many like me.
The government accepts that civil servants can
retire on full pensions at the age of 60 or even before in some
cases, this at taxpayers expense.
Yet it is intent on denying people who have
faithfully followed the rules and believed what we were told by
successive governments about final salary pension schemes—the
opportunity to retire at their scheme retirement date.
The cost of full compensation for the unfortunate
people who have been left without their final salary pension is
not as the prime minister stated in the commons but somewhat lower.
Is it not time that members of parliament and
government ministers started to be a little more honest with the
citizens of this country.
The parliamentary ombudsman found against the
government in the recent investigation—yet we have a situation
where ministers can choose not to accept the findings—some
democratic decision?
The government wants people to be responsible
and save for their retirement, I did and have been badly let down.
If the government does not compensate people for the lost pensions
in full and at normal scheme retirement date then how will confidence
be restored.
My confidence has been shattered, my wife and
family, friends are all shocked by what has happened and by the
attitude of the government. It is going to be difficult to encourage
people to save for retirement if some demonstration is not made.
My circle of friends and family may not be that
wide but when you multiply numbers it starts to add up, how much
of an iceberg is below water? How many people have lost pensions?
May I implore the Committee to consider the
good it would do to restore confidence in pensions if the people
who have lost pensions had their pensions restored in full.
June 2006
| 
