Last updated at 4:45 PM on 19th June 2011
Worried: Hundreds of thousands of women will be affected by pension changes. Posed by model
The Government will press ahead with its timetable to raise the state pension age for women despite the threat of a rebellion by Conservative and Liberal Democrat backbenchers.
MPs of all parties have urged ministers to rethink plans to speed up the equalisation of the pension age for women and men amid warnings that 500,000 women have not had time to plan properly for their retirement.
But the Department for Work and Pensions insisted that the changes would go ahead, warning that any delay would cost the taxpayer 10 billion.
Under the Pensions Bill, which receives its Commons second reading tomorrow, the state pension age for women will go up from 60 to 65 in 2018 - two years earlier than planned under Labour - rising to 66 in 2020.
However, the move has provoked intense cross-party opposition, with MPs warning that it discriminates unfairly against women in their late fifties who will now have to wait longer than they had expected to receive their pensions.
Worst hit will be women born in 1953 or 1954 who could lose about 10,000, according to the Sunday Times.
Labour, shadow pensions minister Rachel Reeves said that ministers should bow to public pressure and rethink their proposals.
'It is simply wrong to punish women by moving the goal posts at this late stage,' she said.
'There is strong and vocal opposition to these unfair pension changes across the UK. It's not too late for David Cameron to think again.'
Senior Tory backbencher Sir Peter Bottomley predicted that the Government would have to back down and accept that the changes were unfair.
Out of pocket: Worst hit by the pension changes will be women born in the early 1950s. Posed by model
'My experience of government is that, in general, when people start to focus, they say, 'Is it necessary to be so unfair?' and if it is not necessary, it is wrong to do it,' he told BBC Radio 4's The World This Weekend.
'It is right to raise the pension age, it is wrong to do it for a particular group so dramatically and at such short notice.'
Ros Altmann, the director general of Saga and a former government adviser on pensions, warned that ministers could face a costly legal challenge if they did not change course.
He said:'Ministers must listen to reason on this issue. The current plans are unfair and may, indeed, be illegal in public law terms, since they clearly do not give women adequate notice of the large changes in pension age that they face.'
'A legal challenge to the fairness of these proposals is likely to be difficult for Government to defend and could end up costing the taxpayer significant sums in court fees and compensation for those affected.'
However, ministers intended to push through the Bill as planned.
A spokesman for the Department for Work and Pensions said: 'We stand by the 2016-2020 timetable for equalisation and raising the state pension age to 66.
'The Bill will go forward without any changes to the timetable. If we delayed the move to 66, it would cost the taxpayer 10 billion and would be an unfair burden on the next generation.'
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario