WE MUST REMEMBER THEM

IF YOU LIVE OUTSIDE THE SOUTH DEVON AREA, HERE'S MY NOVEMBER 2013 "PENSIONERS PLATFORM" COLUMN ARTICLE FROM THE TORBAY TIMES.....

BY the time you are reading this, Remembrance Sunday and Armistice Day 2013 will probably have come and gone, but that is no excuse for us to forget our fallen heroes until next November. Sadly, we in the UK don’t cherish and honour our armed forces veterans in the same way as some other nations do: in particular the USA. However, here in Devon, we may be witnessing the first stirrings of a change that has the potential to go, not only national, but global too.

First things first, you don’t need to have a connection to the internet to get involved in the project mentioned below. On the contrary, all you need is a telephone and a watch or clock that ‘saw’ military action at any time during the 20^th Century, or since. Alternatively, a photograph of a watch being worn by a member of the armed forces who saw action anywhere in the world over the past one hundred years would also make an ideal focal point. Similarly, photographs of other clocks that survived wartime bombardments and/or bombings would be worthy of inclusion in the project too.

So, what’s this all about? Well, on September 20, I received an e-mail at my BBC Radio Devon address. It came from Cathy McAnespie and her husband Steve, who run PrimeTime Ltd in Exeter. The content of the e-mail is self-explanatory, so I’ll reproduce it in full here:-

“Dear David: I’m really hoping you can help me. Both my husband Steve and I love your programme. Hearing you play the V-Disc wartime recordings recently made me think you would be the most suitable person to contact at BBC Radio Devon.

I am creating a horological online archive called “Time for Remembrance”.  The objective is to archive as many photographs and other images of timepieces belonging to all those associated with all conflicts locally, nationally and internationally. The timepiece may, for example, have been worn by a great-grandfather in the trenches of World War I, or saved the life of Tommy at the Somme, or been worn by one of the Land Girls, or be an image of a local church, high street or station clock that survived the Blitz.

We are inviting visitors to our website to post their pictures and stories or leave contact details in order to grow the archive, so that we can attempt to compile the greatest and most diverse compilation of timepieces associated with wartime or conflict ever archived. This is a unique concept, and driven not only by my love of horology but also in awareness that fewer people seem inclined to remember our heroes than used to be the case.

We would please ask that you back our campaign to archive as many timepieces for this Remembrance Day and leading up to the centenary next year.  Please help broadcast this and galvanise the county, the country and ultimately the world, to contribute in the success of commemorating our heroes, and all those associated with all conflicts by getting them to add their images of their timepieces to the website. If possible, it would be wonderful if you could also contribute some images, if you have any.  Please visit our website at www.timeforremembrance.com and also our pages at www.pinterest.com/timeremembrance or call us at PrimeTime of Exeter Ltd, Tel: 01392 207707. My e-mail address is cathymc67@btinternet.com.

It is an honour to be able to do this, and I would be delighted if you were able to contribute by helping to send the message out. Thank you and very best wishes. Cathy McAnespie.”
 

So, there you have it: an inspired innovation, and a permanent on-line archive of remembrance dedicated to all those who served, in whatever capacity, through the many conflicts of the past one hundred years. Congratulations to Cathy and Steve McAnespie on a truly wonderful idea. Call or write to them soon, and ask them if your treasured time-piece or photo would be of interest.

CONTACT

If you would like to make contact with me, you can reach me by e-mail at Davidlowecolumn@aol.com or via mail@torbaytimes.co.uk. Alternatively, you can call me on Skype at david.l.lowe.

SKY NEWS SCRAPS TEXT ON RED BUTTON

HEARING LOSS? Do you suffer from partial or profound deafness? I do. In fact my hearing aids are pictured above. Did you know Sky News has scrapped its text news facility on the red button? Over the past few years I've found that text service to be the ideal way to get my news first thing in the morning. Yes, I know the BBC has a similar service which (for a balance between Sky and the Beeb) I've also used every morning. But why has Sky TV scrapped its news text service in favour of video only? I am so annoyed over this clear-cut case of discrimination against those of us with hearing issues, I sent the following e-mail to Sky News on 1st November. Suffice it to say, I'm still awaiting a reply.
 

---------------------------------
 

Dear News at Sky

I suffer from severe hearing loss, and I'm appalled at the apparent scrapping of your text news on the red button, which I've been using for quite a few years.

If my suspicions are correct, I believe your actions are a clear case of discrimination against those of us with hearing issues. I have therefore copied-in Maria Miller MP, the Secretary of State for Media and Equalities, on this e-mail's circulation.

Yours faithfully
 

-----------------------------------

I have now copied the above e-mail to the Secretary of State and, if you suffer from hearing loss too, I urge you to do the same. Thank you. Best Wishes David (November 5, 2013)

 

 

AND IT'S ABOUT TIME TOO !!

JUST last month [September 2013], six British charities – including Age UK – formed an alliance to urge all political parties to recognise, and act upon, the challenges of an ageing population. The resulting Ready for Ageing Alliance immediately launched a public debate in London. That debate is now considering how the government should respond to the UK’s ageing society.

At last, some action is being taken. But what prompted the creation of the Ready for Ageing Alliance in the first place?  According to a number of media sources, the Alliance was formed in response to a report published in August by parliament’s Public Service and Demographic Change Committee. The contents of that report made it clear that all political parties must take action now, or risk a crisis in the future.

Indeed, the Committee’s Chairman Lord Filkin stated, “Health and social care need to be radically reformed; both are failing older people now. A big shift in services is essential so that the many more older people with long-term conditions can be well cared for and supported in their own homes and in the community, and not needlessly end-up in hospital. All health services and social care must be integrated to help achieve this.”

Lord Filkin then went-on to say, “This is not a distant issue. Our population is older now and will get more so over the next decade. The public are entitled to an honest conversation about the implications.” In addition to Lord Filkin’s comments, the committee’s report accused the government of “woeful unpreparedness” in relation to the UK’s ageing society.

While applauding the above-mentioned developments, I nevertheless feel compelled to ask the parliamentary committee and charities concerned one simple question. Why on earth has it taken such a very long time for these observations about our ageing society to come to the fore?

Allow me to explain the reasons behind my query: following the end of World War II, the government of the time made it clear that Britain needed to urgently restore its population to pre-war levels. That announcement coincided with the arrival home of many thousands of military personnel who’d served overseas through the war years. Suffice it to say significant numbers of them married soon after their return. Result? The Post War Bulge generation … the original Baby Boomers … who became the single biggest generation Britain has ever produced.

In 1948, soon after the first flush of Baby Boomers had arrived, the National Health Service was launched, thus improving universal health care overnight. In the years that followed, a wider – and more nourishing – variety of fruit and vegetables became more readily available to the public at large. That was followed, in turn, by the influx of immigrants from Commonwealth nations, many of whom brought with them their young children of Baby Boomer age.

By the mid-1950s, despite the lingering austerity and very large classroom sizes, the general health and longevity of Britain’s population had begun to improve, thanks in part to the success of the NHS and our healthier dietary habits and life styles. In some ways, those improvements have not only been maintained, but they have also been built-upon ever since. However, there is one notable exception to those improvements: the care of the elderly.

So, instead of blaming today’s government for their “woeful unpreparedness”, shouldn’t Lord Firkin and his committee have pointed-out that the situation we UK pensioners find ourselves in today is due entirely to a shameful lack for foresight on the part of successive governments and politicians in general since the early 1950s?

Over that same period, charities for the elderly have, almost certainly, been trying to awaken the powers-that-be to the dangers of ignoring one obvious fact: that the Baby Boomers would all be arriving at pensionable age in the early years of the 21^st Century. Clearly their warnings have been falling on deaf ears for a very long time. Hence the mess we’re in today.

 

A typical 1950s class size - 37 pupils (and all those who've survived are now pensioners)

MISSED OPPORTUNITIES?

FORMER Labour Home Secretary David Blunkett MP has criticised broadcasters over poor subtitling for those of us who suffer from hearing loss or profound deafness. He has also complained that blind people are being frustrated by the lack of voice dubbing on some of the increasingly popular foreign television drama series.

 

Mr Blunkett is also on record as saying, “Broadcasters talk a lot about equality, but preaching is not enough. In an ageing population, people with hearing and sight impairments are becoming part of the mainstream. It’s no longer about a minority. We are a major sector of the viewing public, and we have the same rights as everyone else who pays the licence fee.

“The way TV executives worship the cult of youth these days seems to be an unstoppable fetish. It is the trendy, the metropolitan and the under-forties who determine what we view and what we listen to. However, much of today’s spending power reflects an older age group.”

Writing this Blog as one who has suffered significant and permanent hearing loss, I wholeheartedly agree with Mr Blunkett. The subtitles issue is a major problem. They’re not only unreliable, but they are also non-existent on some of today’s most watchable TV programming.  And I bet I’m not alone in claiming that far too many of today’s TV presenters, announcers, newsreaders and character actors resort to mumbling or jabbering indistinctly, as if they’re in a private one-to-one conversation.  Clearly, as Mr Blunkett suggests, the subtitles problem and the dubbing issue need to be addressed to take account of the ageing population.

That said: I believe Mr Blunkett has only scratched the surface here. These issues go much deeper than those who suffer aural or visual disabilities and, in doing so, they embrace the whole of the UK’s pensioner population.  In short, we older, more discerning viewers (and radio listeners) have been systematically deprived of our fair share of the TV and radio cake by an undignified scramble for younger and younger audiences. Yet younger people are already spoilt for viewing and/or listening choice.

Take, for example, the TV and radio alternatives available to them. First, there are personal computers, the internet, computerised games, iPods and on-line social networking. Then there’s pubbing and clubbing, and all manner of other activities that can keep them away from their TV screens and radios. Consequently, those elusive younger audiences that the TV and radio executives have been seeking for upwards of twenty years simply aren’t out there.

 

But that’s not the end of the story, because there IS a huge UK audience just waiting to be entertained. That’s you and me folks: pensioners! However, since the mid-1980s, we’ve been sacrificed on the altar of, not only the frantic search for younger audiences mentioned earlier, but also by Janet Street-Porter’s beloved 1980s “yoof culcha” movement. How ironic that Janet Street-Porter joined our pensioner ranks seven years ago!

Now, as if to add injury to insult, and allegedly in an attempt to boost its ratings, Channel 4 has launched a season of programmes about pornography. Hardly the kind of output to appeal to the older, more discerning viewer methinks. But, what an opportunity missed! If Channel 4 (or any other channel for that matter) looked beyond the confines of London or the other metropolitan areas, they would find a huge, untapped audience waiting patiently in the wings: the retired and elderly.

 

Surely the time is now right for a dedicated TV channel catering exclusively for the UK’s pensioners? And I’m not talking about endless re-runs of “Dad’s Army”, “The Last of the Summer Wine”, “As Time Goes By” or – God forbid – latter day soaps. No, there must be plenty of alternatives languishing in the archives that would not only entertain, but would evoke memories of a much more agreeable age and, in doing so, keep our brains alive. One programme that comes to mind is “Dixon of Dock Green”, but there must be many others.

"Evenin' all"

CARE CAP CON TRICK?

YOU may already have seen reports in the News about a £75,000 cap on social care for the elderly. That is to say, those of us who are owner-occupiers and/or those of us with substantial savings, and/or an appropriate insurance policy will not be expected to contribute more than £75,000 of the value of our property, savings or policy, should we need social care in our later years.
 
In February of this year, the Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt announced in Parliament that his proposal for such a cap would be of help to a significant number of people in England. He added that, up to now, many families have faced ruinous costs with little or no assistance from the State, so the proposed new framework would “bring greater certainty, fairness and peace of mind.”

Okay, so how many of us assumed that this £75,000 cap covered care … i.e. nursing and all other related costs … in their entirety? I certainly did, and if you did too, we were wrong: big time! Only now, is it becoming clearer that the cap covers basic nursing costs and nothing more. It does not cover the costs to the individual of retirement or nursing home fees or even the food served at such establishments.

As if that isn’t enough to be getting-on with, there’s a big sting in the tail too. If you are assessed at having “low” or “moderate” care needs, the care costs you incur will NOT count towards the £75.000 cap. Only if your needs are assessed as “substantial” or “critical” will the cap come into play. And, as if to add insult to injury, there’s yet another aspect to this sorry state of affairs that the politicians seem to think is of little or no consequence. The relevant legislation is not likely to come into force until 2017, and if … note the word “if” … the legislation is approved, those who qualify for assistance, over and above the £75,000 cap, are unlikely to start receiving support before 2019 at the earliest.
 
For quite a few years now, local government authorities have been stressing that the care of the elderly is grossly under-funded. So why has the issue been allowed to deteriorate to such an extent? Some campaigners point to 1997 when Tony Blair came to power, and claim they’ve been pressing for – and promised – action ever since. Promises, promises!


Clearly, this is yet another major UK issue involving the retired and elderly that could be resolved overnight by the suspension or scrapping of the largely discredited Overseas Aid we dole-out to all-and-sundry every year. I’m not usually given to quoting chapter and verse but, as a former Sunday school teacher, I’m reminded of a passage from the New Testament … “Why do you seek the speck in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye?” (RSV Matthew 7 verses 3 to 5 inclusive). In other words, let’s put our own house in order FIRST, before we try to resolve the perceived, and sometimes wholly imaginary, problems of other nation states.

By the way, I make no apology for using the words “Con Trick” in the title of this article.

OLDER DRIVERS A DANGER?

 

The Ford Popular in which I passed my driving test in 1963

 

A RECENT report states that drivers over the age of 65 should be required by law to re-evaluate their driving skills and, if necessary, re-take their driving test. Research carried-out by the respected motor industry publication Auto Trader found that one in five of those people questioned in the survey think there should be stricter regulations for older drivers.

Renewal

Currently, a UK driving licence expires when the holder reaches the age of seventy, and if the holder wishes to continue driving he or she must apply to the Driver & Vehicle Agency (DVA) for a renewal. In fact, two months before a driver’s seventieth birthday, and every three years after that, the DVA will send a reminder and a form DL1R to complete. There is no fee levied against this renewal procedure, and there are no compulsory tests to undertake. Nevertheless, all drivers aged seventy or over are urged to check that they are still capable behind the wheel, each time they receive their renewal reminder.

Medical Checks

 

More than twenty per cent of those questioned in the Auto Trader survey; however, felt that the age barrier should be lower than seventy: many suggesting that 65 would be a preferred alternative. Looking at other areas of the survey results, approximately sixty-five per cent of those questioned believe older drivers should also be compelled to undergo medical checks, such as regular sight and coordination tests, before being allowed behind the wheel again. Similarly, thirty per cent of the survey’s respondents thought the government should cut the number of points older drivers are allowed before their licence is revoked.

                                                                       Awareness

Apparently, the most common concerns voiced by those questioned were that older people have a lower level of awareness and slow reaction speeds. As a result, more than a quarter of those surveyed admit to feeling unsafe when getting into a car with a driver over the age of sixty-five.

Discrimination

Did you notice there was one very important four letter word missing from the above statement about awareness and reaction speeds? The word I’m thinking of is “some” and it should sit in front of the words “older people”. True, as we’ve aged, some of us will have lost a proportion of the reaction time we may have had in our late teens and twenties. But that doesn’t mean to say we’ve lost our road sense as well. To suggest that we all lose those skills at the same time, and to the same degree, is just plain wrong, and it smacks of discrimination. Moreover, that statement conveniently overlooks the fact that – regardless of age – some drivers and riders have a shortfall in basic road sense from the very day they venture onto the roads for the first time, and it never improves.

Ageism

Consequently, looking again at the results of that Auto Trader investigation, one begins to wonder about the average age profile of those who responded to the survey. Unfortunately that isn’t made clear in the reports I’ve seen but, reading between the lines, I would hazard a guess that most of the respondents were in the age bracket of – say – twenty-five to fortysomething. That being so, it would seem ageism is rearing its ugly head yet again.

Equal Measure

I’ve been a qualified driver (and motor-cyclist) for very nearly fifty years, and almost from that day in 1964 when I drove solo for the first time, I have been conscious of the fact that the elderly DO NOT have a monopoly on bad driving standards. On the contrary, poor driving skills and a lack of basic road sense covers both sexes and all age groups in equal measure: it always has done, and it always will do. Yes, I’ve made silly mistakes on the road over the years, just like all other drivers and riders. However, I believe I made just as many errors – if not more – between my late teens and late twenties, than I have done since. To back-up my claim, Official statistics show drivers over the age of seventy are safer than those under the age of thirty. The figures speak for themselves: the over seventies make-up nine per cent of drivers but only six per cent of driver casualties, while drivers under thirty make-up twenty per cent of drivers but a whopping thirty-five per cent of casualties.

Mockery

So let’s not hear any more of this ‘lowering of the age barrier’ nonsense from seventy to sixty-five. Suggesting such a move is not only age discrimination, but it also makes a mockery of the government’s plan to raise the retirement age beyond 65. Besides, those who point their accusing fingers at a pensioner behind the wheel of a car overlook the fact that, before they know it, they’ll be a pensioner too … as long as they continue to use our roads safely, with a keen sense of awareness, and a liberal dose of common courtesy towards other road users.
 

 

California 2007 and my hired Chrysler 300 ... what a car!

IF YOU CAN'T BEAT 'EM

 

ACCORDING to a recent report, many youngsters are spurning the age-old tradition of confiding in, and learning from, their grandparents. Instead, they’re turning to their personal computers, laptops and tablets and going on-line in search of answers to life’s more perplexing questions. The internet is, of course, a remarkable resource for facts, figures and general information, but it will never possess something that most grandparents have in abundance … the ability to impart genuine worldly wisdom.

Highs and Lows

Worldly wisdom comes from experiencing the sometimes stark reality of life’s highs and lows up close and personal. Indeed, in common with our own grandparents and their grandparents before them, the life lessons we seniors have learned from those experiences have tended to stay with us. And that’s where their value comes into its own. As was the case when we were young, our grandchildren, and today’s youngsters in general, have a thirst for knowledge and understanding that many of them can’t – or won’t – share with their parents. These issues are often very personal and private concerns that have their root in their relationships with their peers and the wider world.
 

In comparison, most of today’s pensioners have been there, done that and worn-out the T-shirts, and so they carry with them a reservoir of knowledge – worldly wisdom – that can be readily tapped by young people. Taking advantage of this reservoir can bring answers to deeply troubling questions that cannot properly be addressed on-line, and especially on social networks, where self-appointed counsellors peddle their misleading and, sometimes, downright dangerous opinions. 

No I Can’t!

 
So what can we grandparents do to wrestle back the initiative when it comes to interacting with our grandchildren? Well, first and foremost, we could adopt the ancient maxim of “if you can’t beat ‘em, then join ‘em”. Let’s face it, today’s young ones are not going to give-up their cyber lifestyles, so we need to climb on-board too. How? Okay, unless you’ve already done so, why not treat yourself to a laptop, PC or tablet and then ask you grandson(s) and/or granddaughter(s) to show you the basics? Wait a moment, though: I think I can hear some of you shouting at me already! “I’m much to old learn how to work a computer” … “I’m useless at new technology” … “Sit me at a personal computer, laptop or tablet, and I’m bound to break it” … I hear you cry.

Yes You Can!

My answer to all those claims is “oh, no you’re not, and no you won’t!” Instead of putting-up barriers to your options, first ask yourself these questions. Do you use a TV and/or DVD player remote control? And do you remember how easy it was to get the hang of the remote control, and then expand your use of it through trial and error? If your answer to both questions is “yes” then I can assure you, you could learn the basics of how to work a personal computer, laptop or tablet very quickly indeed. From there, it’s just one small step and you’ll be on-line and interacting, not only with your grandchildren, but, even more importantly, with your fellow pensioners all over the UK and overseas.

Free Courses

 Go on, give it a go! I promise you, your world will quickly open-up beyond your wildest dreams and you’ll be asking yourself why you didn’t invest in a personal computer much, much sooner. By the way, if you don’t have grandchildren or you rarely, if ever, see them, there are free personal computer courses for beginners at many libraries around Britain. Once you’re on-line and broadening your cyber horizons through trial and error, why not enrol on Facebook and join the PENSIONERS PLATFORM UK Facebook group page?  I launched the Group last year, and it is growing slowly but steadily and, most important of all, there’s always a warm welcome for new members.

Note: the above article was published in my "Pensioners Platform" column in the April-May 2013 issue of the Torbay Times. If you know a UK pensioner who isn't yet on-line, show this article to them. The more of us who go on-line, the sooner our voice will be heard in the corridors of power!
 

YOU'RE OUT OF ORDER YOUR GRACE

Bishop of London Richard Chartres condemned the way today’s ‘fortunate generation’ of retirees are soaking up tax- payers’ money.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2340670/Anger-bishop-tells-baby-boomer-Senior-church-cleric-dubbed-divisive-unfair-wrong-comments.html#ixzz2W5OxjtdY
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook


OAP-UK COMMENT:-


AS a Baby Boomer himself, the Bishop of London must surely recall the austerity - the hardships - of the 1950s? Or was he shielded from such things by accident of birth and never used a bomb site as a playground? Or sat in a primary school class of more than forty kids? Come into the real world Your Grace. You're bang out of order! We Baby Boomers helped to re-build this nation post war. And even The Bible says you reap what you sow! That's what we Baby Boomers are doing today ... we're harvesting our rightful entitlements, for all our hard work over 50 years and more. It's the politicians and ill-iinformed academics who've turned Britain into the mess it's in today ... not we Baby Boomers!

A TWO TIER STATE PENSION?

Iain Duncan Smith ~ just one of the 'strip wealthier pensioners' brigade

 

AT THE END of my post titled "Europe's Poor Relations" I suggested that the recent threats by high ranking political figures to strip “wealthier” UK pensioners of their bus passes, winter fuel allowances, TV licences and free eye tests, was an attempt to divide and rule. By creating a ‘them and us’ culture within the pensioner community, the politicians appear to be hoping that we’ll be left squabbling among ourselves. That, in turn, would prevent us uniting under a common objective and realising our full potential as an election-winning voting bloc.

Sadly, this politically driven, divide-and-rule ploy doesn’t end with the bus pass/winter fuel allowance/TV licence/eye test issue. On the contrary, the recently announced flat-rate state pension proposed for April 2017 “at the earliest” can also be seen to have divide-and-rule at its core. In fact, the proposals, as they stand, threaten the creation of an even more divisive ‘them and us’ … ‘haves and have nots’ … culture within the post-2017 UK pensioner community.

Here are the ‘flat-rate pension’ proposals in simple English: only new pensioners will be eligible, so existing pensioners and anyone who qualifies for a state pension before 2017 will continue to be paid under the present system. This can be topped up with pension credit and other means tested benefits where circumstances demand. In other words, tthose of us who are already drawing a state pension by the end of 2016 will continue to do so under the proposed changes, but those retiring from 2017 onwards will be paid the equivalent of £144 per week in today’s money.

In the Long Run

Rowena Crawford at The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) goes further. She said that the Government’s proposals for a flat rate £144 a week state pension from 2017, “imply a cut in pension entitlements for most people in the long run. The main effect will be to reduce pensions for the vast majority of people, while increasing the rights for some particular groups: most notably the self-employed.”

Ms Crawford then went-on to say that the proposals were, “a welcome simplification. There will be a fairly complex pattern of winners and losers from the reform in the short-term, but the main effect, in the long run, will be to reduce pensions for the vast majority of people.”

So, according to a very highly placed and respected spokeswoman, the 2017 flat-rate pension proposals will eventually amount to a cut in pension for the vast majority. She actually uses the phrase “in the long run” twice which, in plain English, translates to “as today’s pensioners die off (that’s you and me folks) so the flat-rate pension becomes the norm”. Here I must refer back to another point I made in my "Europe's Poor Relations" article, namely: when expressed as a percentage of a nation’s average weekly wage, UK pensioners are already paid one of the LOWEST state pensions in the EU. That, in turn, raises one simple question. Are the powers that be suggesting we should be at the very bottom of the state pension pile beyond 2017?

Political Inertia

Some might call it crying over spilt milk, but the fact remains that the immediate post World War II governments should have seen, and acted upon, what any self-respecting anthropologist could have predicted for Britain from the 2010s onwards. But they didn’t.  Consequently all of the surviving members of the Post War Bulge … the original Baby Boomer generation … are arriving at retirement age at the same time, and they’re being blamed for the mess successive post war governments have caused through lack of vision and forethought. Indeed, it’s ironic to think that married couples were actively encouraged by the government of the time to have babies as soon as World War II ended, in an effort to restore the UK population to its pre-war levels. Hence the Post War Bulge … the Baby Boomers.

Clearly the damage was done by political inertia more than sixty years ago and, regrettably, that’s all water under the bridge. However, our life styles have changed dramatically since the Post War austerity of the 1950s, so there’s still time to remedy the situation and, in doing so, provide all UK pensioners with a decent single-tier state pension that places us near the top of the EU pensions league, instead of at or close to the bottom.

Solution?

So, how might that be achieved?  Simples! Suspend or scrap altogether our bloated, and largely discredited, Overseas Aid hand-outs and use the savings to put our own house in order FIRST … i.e. pensions, NHS, education, infrastructure, law and order, etc … before trying to assist other nation states with their problems.  After all, every penny frittered away in Overseas Aid has its origins in the UK taxpayers’ pockets!

BALLS AT IT AGAIN !

NOT satisfied with threatening to withdraw the Winter Fuel Allowance from "wealthier" pensioners, earlier this week, Shadow Chancellor Ed Balls (pictured) has now implied that a Labour government would also withdraw free TV licences from the top five per cent of "wealthier" UK pensioners.

My pensions income amounts to less than £10,000 pa, so I'm not likely to be targeted on the WFA or TV licence threats. However, once again, I find myself asking: will this TV licence plan prove to be the tip of the iceberg? Would it be the first step towards the complete withdrawal of free TV licences for ALL of Britain's oldest pensioners? Most important of all, how does he propose to impliment such a move ... through a blanket means testing of EVERY pensioner in the land?

Clearly, Balls is hoping, here, to deepen the culture of "haves" and "have nots" among Britain's pensioners. And that's called divide and rule. But, whatever our feelings on the issue, before we start saying it's fair to deprive the richest UK pensioners of these benefits, we MUST demand an assurance that this kind of move ... by any government ... would not mark the first stage of the wholesale axing of such benefits or entitlements.

BALLS THREAT TO FUEL ALLOWANCE

Brrrrrrr or should that be Grrrrrr?



ED Balls threatens a Labour policy to withdraw the Winter Fuel Allowance from all pensioners with an income of more than £42,000 pa (Mirror on-line June 3).

Point 1) ... that's ripe coming from one of the major players in the Blair-Brown govt's 'spend, spend, spend and to hell with the consequences' regime, that helped to get us into the economic mess we're in today!
Point 2) ... how does he propose to enforce such a move? A blanket means test for all pensioners?

Point 3) ... but will it end there at £42,000 pa? Or would this be just a first step to the scrapping of the Winter Fuel Allowance altogether? Those of us who have a lot less than £42K coming-in need a clear undertaking from Balls & Co that our WFA is safe!



 

EUROPE'S POOR RELATIONS?

EUROPE’S POOR RELATIONS?

CURRENTLY there are approximately ten million UK pensioners, but our basic state pension doesn’t bear much scrutiny when compared to the rest of Europe, or the rest of the Western world for that matter. In fact, when expressed as a percentage of a nation’s average earnings, we in the UK are paid one of the LOWEST state pensions in Europe.

Conversely, of the thirty-five nations across Europe, the United Kingdom sits at a perfectly respectable tenth in terms of its Gross Domestic Product (source: Infopedia.com). Also, according to the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund’s 2011 rankings, the UK is the twenty-second richest nation in the world (source: Wikipedia.org). However, where state pensions are concerned, we UK pensioners are close to the bottom of the pile.

So why are we so badly-off when compared to most of our European neighbours, and why are some of us being threatened with the loss of our bus passes, winter fuel allowances, TV licences and free eyesight testing?

Soft Target

In short, it all dates back to 1980 when Margaret Thatcher’s Conservative government decided that the UK basic state pension should be calculated against the prices index only, instead of a ‘whichever is the higher’ comparison between the prices index and the national average earnings, as had been the case up to then. Soon after this change was introduced, the prices index began falling behind the national average earnings index and it has continued to slide ever since. Today, our basic state pension is equivalent to approximately thirty per cent of the UK’s national average earnings, whereas the average EU state pension is around sixty per cent of earnings. (Source: OECD)

While PM David Cameron’s coalition government has undertaken a mammoth task in seeking-out ways to reduce costs across the board, we pensioners could argue that we’re being singled-out unfairly.  Indeed, in view of the above mentioned comparisons with our EU neighbours and the threats to our benefits alluded to earlier, one might even be forgiven for claiming that the powers-that-be are viewing UK pensioners as a soft target.

Community Work

Take, for example, the comments by Lord Birchard (a former head of the Benefits Agency) who, during a recent meeting of a committee investigating demographic changes and their impact on public services, put forward the suggestion that, if an incentive was promised, some pensioners might be able to carry-out community work.

His actual words were, “Are there ways in which we could use incentives to encourage older people – if not to be in full time work – to be making a contribution?  It is quite possible, for example, to envisage a world where civil society is making a greater contribution to the care of the very old, and older people who are not very old could be making a useful contribution to civil society in that respect, if they were given some incentive or some recognition for doing so.”

Excuse me? Older people who are not very old could be making a useful contribution? Surely we pensioners have contributed quite enough in National Insurance, plus income and other taxes, not mention sheer hard graft, over the past fifty years and more to entitle us to a meaningful return on our investment, without having to justify it? After all, the basic state pension is not a benefit. It’s an entitlement.

Regrettably, Lord Birchard is not alone in targeting UK pensioners. While Labour have remained uncharacteristically silent throughout, the Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg waded into the bus pass and winter fuel allowance issue in December, when he stated that the Liberal Democrats would “look again” at universal benefits: arguing that welfare payments “should not be paid to those who do not need them.” Similarly, the Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan-Smith has signalled that the winter fuel allowance, TV licences, bus passes and free eye tests may be means tested after the next general election.

Divide and Rule

When considered together, the above statements seem to be saying wealthier pensioners should be stripped of these universal benefits by way of a means test. That must surely mean ALL pensioners will need to be means tested.  But who defines what the word “wealthier” means? And how much is it going to cost the government to conduct the means testing of every pensioner, merely to seek-out the comparatively few who, perhaps, have been fortunate enough to build-up a decent private pension, or put aside savings for their old age?

Whichever way you look at these issues, it becomes increasingly obvious that politicians of most persuasions are starting to wake-up to the fact that ten million or so UK pensioners represent a huge and potentially election winning, voting bloc. However, instead of wooing us, some very highly placed political figures are trying to drive a wedge between us and, in doing so, create a “them and us”… a “haves and have nots” … culture within the UK pensioner community. That’s what is called divide and rule, and we pensioners must make it clear to those who govern us that, far from being divided, we intend to stand united against any move to means test our basic state pension.

 

David Lowe (2013)

 

The above article was published in the Feb-March 2013 edition of the Torbay Times

HELLO & WELCOME

HELLO and welcome to the OAP UK Blog: a place where we UK Pensioners can have our (politically unaffiliated) say on how we're coping with day-to-day life, or what we think about the way we're being treated by the 'powers that be'.

I'm detemined to maintain this Blog's politically non-affiliated position. Indeed, I'll challenge all politicians, media types, public figures, trades union spokespeople and others - regardless of their political persuasion - if they dare to denigrate pensioners. By the same token, I'll praise them if they genuinely support us. But will I advocate joining-in their party politicking? Never! On the contrary, this Blog will remain unaffiliated, because most of us who are UK pensioners live in the real world, and not within some cocooned 'party' machine.

 

And on that point, let me assure you I have nothing to hide. I have no political allegiances or hidden agendas. I'm simply a semi-retired independent author, feature writer, broadcaster, former showbiz columnist, former photo-journalist and former musician. What's more, I think it's about time the 'powers that be' started treating those of us over 60 years of age with rather more care and consideration. After all, we represent a very substantial voting bloc!

So, if you're a bona fide UK pensioner, or you're approaching pensionable age, please feel free to contibrute to this Blog. Your opinions are important and valued ... but please ... no foul language (simulated or otherwise), no personal political allegiances, and no libel or slander.

 

All comments on this Blog will be moderated before they're considered for publication.

 

Thank you. Best Wishes

 

DAVID LOWE