State pensions fury: Rishi Sunak under pressure as new demand to reduce lifespan to 63 fires | United kingdom

State pension increase: Turner collides with guest Jeremy Fine

The UK government pension is currently 66 for men and women. However, it has collected a petition on the official website of the two houses of Parliament demanding that it be reduced by 5,469 signatures.

Mark Grimes, who created it, urged the government to “lower the state retirement age to 63 for all”.

The petition read: “Reduce the state retirement age to 63. Certain jobs may not be able to be done as we age, for example, construction workers, heavy vehicle drivers.

Of course, there will always be an exception, because some seniors will be more capable than others.

The government should do more to create jobs for young people by allowing old people to retire if they wish at 63, so that these jobs can be filled by young people.

A petition calling for the state retirement age to be lowered to 63 (Image: GETTY)

“The government should do more to create jobs for young people” (Image: GETTY)

This would also protect the elderly from having to work if this job is too demanding.

“This will also free up grandparents so they can help their children take care of the children while they work.”

If the petition reaches 10,000 signatures, the government must issue a response.

If it attracts 100,000 signatures, it will be discussed in Parliament.

Read more: Girl raped in broad daylight in rural park in ‘shocking’ test


Lowering the retirement age to 63 will leave a hole in Britain’s public finances (Image: GETTY)

See also  The UK government has included Venezuela in its list of countries at risk of contracting Covid-19

The deadline to sign the petition is December 7, 2021, after which it will expire.

This came on the heels of reports that the government plans to increase national insurance to pay for social assistance.

This will result in a tax increase for 25 million people, in violation of the 2019 Conservative Party manifesto.

According to the Daily Telegraph, Downing Street is considering a 1 per cent increase in National Insurance, while some in the Treasury are pushing 1.25 per cent.

do not miss

Shocking data shows how weak the state pension is [REVEAL]
Defenders of the triple blockade of state pensions consider refusing to vote [SHOCK]
Retirees must pay National Insurance! Rishi Sunak Funds Social Assistance [INSIGHT]


The government could boost National Insurance to fund welfare (Image: GETTY)


The 2019 Conservative election manifesto ruled out an increase in National Insurance (Image: GETTY)

The statement for the December 2019 conservative elections read: “We promise not to increase rates of income tax, national insurance or value-added tax.

We not only want to freeze taxes, we also want to reduce them.”

Under the proposals, individual welfare costs could be limited, preventing many people from having to sell their homes to fund subsidies.

The extra money will also be used to remove the NHS backlog, which arose during the coronavirus crisis.

Expected changes to government pensions in 2022

Currently 5.5 million people are waiting for treatment at an NHS hospital, but this is feared to rise to 13 million.

However, the plan has already been criticized by business leaders, who have warned that it could cost jobs.

See also  The International Monetary Fund announces its decision "very soon" on Georgieva's future | Economie

Craig Beaumont of the Small Business Consortium warned that the move could cause financial damage.


The state pension is currently 66 for men and women (Image: GETTY)

Speaking to the Daily Telegraph, he said: “Increasing the labor tax for employees and employers will make finding and keeping jobs more expensive for businesses.”

Kitty Usher of the Institute of Directors warned that companies “will find it difficult to understand why the government would want to raise employer payroll taxes to pay for the necessary investment.”

The British economy contracted by 9.9% in 2020 when the coronavirus hit, the worst in more than 300 years.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *