I came in 1990, but it was clear to me that the pension was just basic .Why would you think that benefits meant for uk residents should be available to people who chose to leave and live elsewhere
I expect you can now show me where it was said when the WFP was announced that there was a postcode lottery regarding to whom it would be paid.
At the same time I would be interested to know, if it was intended for UK residents, why was it then changed to be available to other British pensioners, before George Smith came along and made a completely spurious justification for denying it to some non-UK residents, but not others.
I’m sorry but that is so untrue… it is the case that pensioners in countries other than the EU/EEA &Etc don’t get an uplift - Australia and Canada as two clear examples but others do get a continuing uplift and are equally entitled to other benefits IIRC.
Are you yet a UK pensioner and benefiting from this or from what position are you making your claims?
What is so untrue?
No I 'm not a uk pensioner
your statement that the pension was just basic…
do you expect to be?
I’m also curious as to your use of the term “basic” pension - what does that mean to you in the context in which you used it?
What are (were) your expectations?
I’m not being tedious - just trying to understand where the comment came from, that’s all.
Basic pension means the minimum that I am entitled to ,with none of the extras from living in that country WFP bus passes attendence allowences etc. The mentality behind it is simple I left the UK of my own free will , why should I expect hand outs.
is an earned pension entitlement really a handout?
IIRC unless it has changed post Brexit, attendance allowances are continued to be paid to UK State pensioners (unless someone can otherwise correct me with a DWP reference).
Tim there is no justification for anyone thinking that’s positive. The UK’s inflation rate has a big part of it due to economic mismanagement.
The markets know this and the FX rate moves to compensate and in fact has already overcompensated due to the same undeying cause , the markets have assessed and don’t have confidence in the economic prospects of the UK.
Most of the time the markets are right.
It’s not a handout it’s earned Flocreen. Plenty of people get denied all or part of state pension because they haven’t paid enough in every year of their working life in the UK.
Anything normally paid to pensioners - especially if it’s only paid to pensioners which is the case for WFA - should be paid. It’s none of the UK government’s business where you are and they should not welsh on earned state pension rights or indeed any other right earned with a pension.
If I hadn’t made the decision to live in France I would still be in other places than the UK throughout most of my retirement including as many much colder places and some warmer That’s none of the UK government’s business as once I’m retired they shouldn’t have any right to keep me on a noose. It’s none of their business how and where I spend my time if I’ve paid in full and I have…, more than.
Well said
Seconded
I think it’s more likely that other EU countries didn’t have overseas territories that were integral parts of the colonial power and so didn’t adversely affect their average winter temps in the context of the WFA criteria. By contrast France’s overseas territories are departements not colonies, so their statistics contribute to French national ones.
Nevertheless it was still a crap manoeuvre
However, a far worse ruling which hasn’t yet been mentioned, is that if you retire to many other countries your state pension isn’t index linked because there aren’t international reciprocal agreements and of course there isn’t an S1 either.
I see the no confidence votes failed.
I don’t think most Republicans wanted a snap election as they’d probably lose more seats, but conversely, the numbers unofficially demonstrating on the streets aren’t that high. The proposed changes are crap for the people affected, but because the issue is so polarised and the focus is on the state pension, little has been made of the many professional and artisanal supplementary pensions that co-exist alongside the state pension.
The following is anecdotal but may be relevant info
i) Most of our French friends who are retired, retired early on their supplementary pensions.
ii) My wife is retired on a UK state pension and other non French stuff, and her medical treatment is largely covered mainly by the S1 treaty and the rest by our private mutual insurance. Now all she wants to do is exhibit in France and be able to declare her sales on our French tax return. This is so simple in the UK, but here it’s massively bureaucratic and restrictive.
To legally continue as an exhibiting artist, she is expected to pay into a pension fund and pay a social charge, even though she doesn’t need a pension and is legally exempt from the latter. To legitimately be an exhibiting artist in France one needs to jump through all sorts of protectionist hoops. This protectionism seems a modern continuation of the mediaeval guild system.
back to the riots, I saw a piece to camera on France3 news this lunchtime showing a female person wearing a white facemask (Phantom of the opera type but full face) to disguise her identity but clearly in her hand was a large metal crowbar the size of a walking stick - peaceful picketing? These people are just thugs
Ahem DrMarkH. Quite apart from any legal or tax perspectives, are other artists or anyone else about going to be worried by her activities?
If not then I might consider a corporate structure along the lines being discussed in another thread today, ideally HQ’d in the UK as that’s where her pension comes from, or I might look into a charity or foundation which researches the links between nature painting and psychological equilibrium of seniors in the Aveyron… or something, with some expenses covered by the disposal of research artefacts …
I would say verging on the ad hominem and therefore we would appreciate an edit.
Erm no.
nice to know my efforts are appreciated.