Superannuation Bill

Memorandum submitted by Stephen Low (SU 19)

If I had known 20 years ago that my compensation if I was to be made redundant was to be unilaterally reduced by 80% (Yes EIGHTY) then I would have; 

1. Left the civil service

2. Paid into a savings/insurance scheme to cover the loss

3. Sought for higher pay, commensurate with that offered by the private sector (and then option 2).

 But fundamentally, If I am promised something (compensation of 6 years due to the 1987 agreement) then morally I would expect a civilised society and it's government to honour such an agreement.

 If made redundant I will be claiming ESA (I am disabled) much earlier than if the current agreement was in place; so the burden on the 'state' (6 years pay or 5 years of ESA) would almost be the same. Then there is the psychological damage the poverty will do to me, and the legal case of 'theft' of what is already earnt by myself, by this bill I would bring against the crown, and my wife will do so after my suicide.

 To take from what is promised to someone who has given great service to the crown is against my human rights; I just wonder how those who 'have enough' can live with their consciences, could vote for such an act. By all mean freeze pay, but don't take from others what is already their entitlement.

September 2010