Pensions Bill

Written evidence by Catherine M Kirby (PB 02)

This submission refers primarily to Part 1 of the Pensions Bill (2013) Section 1 State Pension Part (2) A person who reaches pensionable age before 6 April 2016 is not entit led to benefits under this part. The government needs please to include us women born between ’51 to 5.4.1953 in the Bill and make transitional arrangements to provide us with the better of the Pensions options STP or SP as per evidence given at the Select Committee 2013 and has been highlighted in writing and verbally: Amendments to the Pension Bill to include us as above need to be made thank you for the sake of justice and against New and Intentional Decades of Female Discrimination and Injustice and a total unjust cliff-edge which again is unjust and discriminatory due to us being under equalisation

1. When the new flat rate better pension of £145.00 pw set at/above the means test level

comes in, women born between ‘51 to 1953 will as it s tands only get the old £110 +any serps/s2p whilst a ll men of the same dob's ’51 to 1953 as these women and some men even younger and older will get the better ((DWP) ST which could be near an extra £35 pw over 20 years this equates to up to £35 000 that is if the women live that long, also women 1 one second younger dob’s 6.4.1953 will also get the bett er for thousands of them STP + will also receive this some 1 One year and ten months BEFORE all the men of their same birthdates so at 6.4.53. 96wksx£145=£13,920 2 years before all the men of their same birthdates 5.4.53 loss £2480 @ 104wksx£110=£11,440

Eg’s	Dob	Gender	SP Weekly All Excl; any S2P/Serps
Twins	01.08.1952	Male	£145.00  + upratings
	01.08.1952	Female	£110 triple lock 2013 = £2+
	27.07.1952	Male	£145 noting the male is younger than female
	30.08.1952	Female	£110
	10.10 1952	Male	£145 = for whole rest of life
	11.10 1952	Female	£110
	05.04.1953	Female	£110
	05.04.1953*	Male *	£145 male are in the same birth group STP
	06.04.1953*	Female*	£145 as women who will get ‘upgrade ‘STP

Some at ONE YEAR & TEN MONTHS BEFORE MEN OF THE SAME DATE OF BIRTH AS THEM *Male STP in year 2018 *Female STP in year 2016 .

This as above is obviously unjust and wrong not to include 51 to 5.4.1953 birthdate women £110 per week is a small amount to live on per week: for all accommodation utilities, bills, food, clothes and everything. These women affected adversely are dob's ’51 to 5.4.1953 men of that exact dob will get £145pw., and the 6.4.1953 women. Us women dob's ‘51 to 6.4.1953 have/are already having our/the state pension age upped to be equalized with men: due to the Pension Act 1995 +, and in my case by over 2 1/2 years +some of the women by 3 years. Some of us ‘lose’ out on the ’better’ for 70 000 by up to three years equalisation wait. Women some 1 second younger will get the ‘better/upgrade’ (DWP’s words) STP nearly some nearly two years before the same birth date men . DWP Paper on women dob ’51 to 5.4.1953 shows that 70 000 of these women will be better off under the STP, and that 105 000 will not be able to defer their pension; total group no. are 700 000 w e women are for equalisation. It needs though to be ju st and not discriminatory as is currently.

2. I put below a simple proposal which could easily be done at a limited cost (for females in the 'catch' as it stands ‘51 to 1953) vis-a-vis men of the exact same dob or of a younger age (after the females have already started the equalisation/wait some by years( The State single tier is now projected to be less than cost neutral.) Billions were saved from the cost by the 2016 introduction as opposed to 2017 date. We are not after a hand up nor a hand out we do need justice and equality .

3. A simple way to 'correct' the anomaly to women born between ’51 to 5.4 1953 in relation to men and in relation to some women that are one second younger and some of whom had a two month uplift by 2011 Act would be to pay the ’51 to 5.4 1953 women the State Pension Rate of the day currently £110 (and any accrued S2P) and when these group of women reach the SP retirement age of men of the same identical dob date that they then get the 'new' better £145+ flat rate pension as the men would of the exact same dob. Or if the government wanted to be more just is to pay the women when the Pension Act comes into force 2016 t he better of the STP or SP and by r ightly including us in the Bill as they are doing so for all the rest of post 5.4.53 dob’s . W e are all equalising .

4. This would overall be at a limited cost to the Government. These women would likely have some S2P as I do and some also as I will have by then 44+ years of NI contributions and credits for the Contribution Based State Pension. This would also REFLECT POSITIVELY on Parliament in relation to equality and justice. Many of these women would be of lower earnings category and lower socio-economic class, so the additional pounds are a necessity in the on-going daily struggle when one is in a low economic position. I do have some S2P however not to the amount to equate to £145 pw STP rate. Some of us women have no other pension. On low income many of these women would not have other pensions. Life expectancy is also lower for females in a lower socio-economic class. Any of us that may have been aware of (1995 Pension Act) for 2010 commencement of equalisation w ould not necessarily financially be able to make / provide any improvements to our financial/pension

situation/arrangements: particularly the women in lower socio economic situation/employment.

5. I note that Ros Altman ‘Pensions’ highlighted t his matter (anomaly) '' What to expect...'' Re: State Pension re. women already affected by the 1995/Equalization Pension Act: Quote: Might the Government consider a tiered introduction of the new syste m, rather than a stark cut-off That might assuage some of the feelings of unfairness that are likely to arise, particularly for women whose pension age has already increased after 2010 under arrangements put in place by the 1995 Pension Act. RA again elaborated the sam e 11 March 2013 the day after S Webbs’s evidence. " Prof J Ginn gave written evidence in our cohort’s favour: The cliff edge(s) also referred to by others and by Craig Berry to give these women the better of the pensions .

6. Since 1940’s men’s state pension age(SPA) has been 65 years of age: women’s SPA was 60: Since the 2010 commencement it has been steadily increasing by equalisation. Additionally men get winter fuel allowance and bus passes at the current SP age as women, so this has been equalized to the woman’s age to assist ALL men (Also though this not the 'answer' men that get Pension Min imum Guarantee Cr *(see Page3 Pt . 10) get it at the same SP age as women) so the flat rate £145 needs justly to be equalis ed to ALL f emales with the same dob as men, and with that of women 1 second younger .

7. In the Impact Assessment 15.1 2013 to the Pensions Bill 2013 points 81. ‘’Single-Tier will go some way to reducing the current gender inequality’ Pt . 84: improve outcomes (as it) ‘’most benefits lower paid and part time workers who are predominately women .’ ‘ Reliance on means testing Pt. 39 " Means tested benefits may not always be the most effective way to ensure that all poorer pensioners receive the minimum available…’’

8. ’From the Document DWP Equality Objectives 2012-2016: Table 1: Customer Focus Objectives: Page 6 item Number 3 states ‘’Address gender inequality of State Pensions by seeking to reform the State Pension System’’.

9. DWP Pension model of 2012 for 2015-2017 (D . o . b’s 51-53 constantly shows a < 2:1 ratio and above ‘’in favour’’ of males vs females to have State Pension above £145 (the single tier rate) and as per FOI information.

10. In Hansard 25 June 2012 Steve Webb says :’’ We are taking a planned budget, simplifying the system, but not treating anyone adversely.’’ Obviously this is not the case for this group of females and will if passed in government lead to further gender inequality specifically for these women and Decades of New and Intentional Discrimination and injustice for this specific ’51 to 5.4. 1953 group of women, along with a totally unjustifiable and unnecessary cliff-edge .

11. I note any Person with greater S2P than the flat rate will be compensated in the 'new' system. I note that these men dob 195 1 /3+ will be waiting longer; hence the equalisation of these women who are being subject to the Pension Act 1995 +so waiting longer since 2010.+ Men will get the better flat rate pension for the whole rest of their lives. As will the women mentioned dob 6.4.1953 ( 1 sec, younger ) for the whole rest of their lives some for one 1 year and 10 months before men of the exact same date of birth as them. Also noted the in Pension s Bill 2013 that 35 years of NI contributions/cr s. will be required for STP. Numbers of the women born ‘51-53 will have up to 44 years of NI contr ibutions/crs .The number currently required is 30 years , it will soon be 35 years and in 2007 it was 39 years: 42/4 is greater. The Government has said it wants to help the specific type and group of women as I have detailed above : however is has targeted our cohort for the ‘perfect storm’ It is unjust for the government not to assist as and to not include us in the Bill and by just transitional arrangements .

12. For Females subject to Pension Act 1995 this one particular group of people will be treated totally UNJUSTLY AND INEQUITABLY by the proposed plans in 12 ways at least and totally DISCRIMINATED AGAINST in contributory SP vis a vis their male peers and peer group women one second younger in age . please see 12 points below  
1. This group are all females - so by gender
2. '' '' - so by date of birth which is between ‘51 and 6 .4. 1953 only
3. '' '' will have longest years for some of NI conts/crs (44 years for some :the maximum for men then was 44 years and for women 39years ) for the CONTRIBUTORY State Pension
4. '' '' will by plans be made the most financially disadvantaged by the Govt.,
5. '' '' will be financially disadvantaged in relation to all men of the exact same dob (who will get better flat rate) and they will also be permanently disadvantaged against women one second younger
6 '' '' will be financially disadvantaged in an on-going and permanent way
7. '' '' will for the rest of their lives be discriminated against by this Government
8. '' '' will/have already had their state pension age upped by up to 'years' to wait by 1995 Pension Act + in force 2010+ Some will have waited up to 3years equalisation

9. ,, ,,In this group of women many will be of the lower socio-economic/caring group that the Government has said that it wants to help.
10. ,, If the government said Pension Min Guarantee *it would discriminate against women born between ‘51 to 1953 who would be subject to a means test whilst men of exact same dob or older or younger in that period would not, this would be specific gender discrimination against this specific group of females and also be opposite to another of its aims to reduce means testing for the contributory state pension(s)/ers and additionally the women 1 sec younger would not be means tested either and receive their pension earlier than the men the same dob as them .

11. All will have lost out on some pension due to equalisation and some of the cohort will lose up to 3 years of state Pe nsion had they had as pre 2010 their contributory pension at age 60 years .

12. From The National Equality Panel / LSE ..Inequality in the UK 2010 and with permission of the Chair Professor John Hills: Resources in Later Life..(12)) ‘Inequalities are amplified … ..magnified in the resources available for retirement ….. through pensions’’

Recommendation:

Thank you for your time and just consideration and tabling an amendment to include us in the Pensions Bill 2013 for just and beneficial pension outcomes that are the most beneficial to ALL of our gr oup born between ’51 to 5.4.195 3 ’" giving us the best( monetary amount) of the pension options STP or SP " and for letting me give as a stakeholde r and campaigner of our s takeholder group of women oral evidence at the Pension Bill 2013 committee again thank you .

June 2013