Retirees should lose free TV licences, state pension triple lock - and pay National Insurance, says Lords committee

25 April 2019

A report from the House of Lords Committee on Intergenerational Fairness and Provision has made wide-ranging recommendations on benefits for the elderly, calling for much of the help for older generations to be curtailed.

It has called for the free TV Licence for over-75s to be phased out, and for the state pension triple lock to be ditched.

The report has also criticised Winter Fuel Payments and older person’s bus passes, calling for both benefits to be only made available five years after state pension age, and treated as taxable income.

The committee has also attacked the National Insurance system as unfair, and says individuals over the state pension age should pay.

It also makes recommendations for reform of council tax, stamp duty and inheritance tax. 

The committee has published these recommendations as part of a wide-ranging look at government rules and policies in order to "deliver a fairer society" and support younger generations better. 

The chair of the committee, Lord True, comments: "We found that intergenerational bonds are still strong, and the evidence suggested both young and older people recognise the contribution the other makes and the challenges they face.

"However, there is a risk that those connections could be undermined if the Government does not get a grip on key issues such as access to housing, secure employment and fairness in tax and benefits."

National Insurance

The National Insurance system “functions poorly” as National Insurance Contributions (NICs) do not directly pay for the state pension, nor are they linked to any actual rules on the size of state pension payments, according to the committee.

The report says it is unfair that only those of working age pay the tax, and that those over state pension age should also contribute.

The committee says NICs should be merged into the income tax system, and that this would protect vulnerable older people from having to pay as contributions would be weighed against income.

David Sinclair, director of the International Longevity Centre – UK (ILC) comments: "The National Insurance exemption for older workers seems an anachronism. And savings could be better invested in any number of other initiatives – including in addressing the gross underfunding of public health and social care.

"Pensioner benefits are a matter of increasing political debate. While there is a strong case for universal pensioner benefits, it is also perfectly reasonable that these benefits should be taxed, so that those who can afford to pay do.”

State pension triple lock

The committee has called for the state pension triple lock to be abolished and instead increased alongside average workers' pay.

The report states: “The triple lock for the State Pension should be removed. The State Pension should be uprated in line with average earnings to ensure parity with working people.

“However, there should be protection against any unusually high periods of inflation in the future.”

Steven Cameron, pensions director at Aegon comments: “As the age profile and distribution of wealth of our population continues to change, it's critical that all government policies are considered through a lens of intergenerational fairness.

“The state pension triple lock has served its purpose of boosting the level of state pensions faster than average earnings but continuing it indefinitely is not financially sustainable."

Free TV Licences

The free TV Licence for over-75s has also been criticised. The report calls for the free TV licence to be phased out and those who can afford it should pay. It recommends that the government subsidise the poorest households instead.

The BBC is currently undergoing a consultation on whether or not to maintain the benefit as the cost is set to be passed to the corporation from the government in June 2020.

Bus passes and Winter Fuel Payments

The report also mentions the use of free bus passes for older people.

In London, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland the free bus pass begins at age 60 but for the rest of England it applies from the age of 65 and will increase in line with state pension age.

While the committee received criticism that the bus pass is accessible to some people who are still of working age, it conceded that there was an environmental case to be made to sustain it as the free bus pass encourages older people to use public transport instead of motor vehicles.

Winter Fuel Payments also come under the microscope.

The report says that the payments are “not well targeted.” It argues that single parents of working age are much more likely than single people or couples over the age of 60 to be in ‘fuel poverty’ and it therefore unfair that these households receive a subsidy to pay energy bills.

In both the case of Winter Fuel Payments and the free buss pass the committee recommends that people should not be given access to the benefit more than five years after reaching state pension age.

However, it recommends that transitional arrangements be put in place to protect those already in receipt of the benefit, who might lose out from rule changes.

It also says the government should look at treating these benefits as taxable income for those above the personal allowance threshold (currently £12,500 per year).

Mr Cameron adds: “With the Baby Boomer generation now above age 55 and increasingly in retirement, it's right to consider if blanket benefits for older generations remain appropriate or if the cost of funding these is falling disproportionately on younger workers.

“The average income of a pensioner couple is now £454 a week which means that incomes are now around 70% of non-retired households. This represents a huge change over recent decades and the stereotype of retirement as a time of constant thrift is largely outdated.

"Pensioner incomes have steadily risen as a result of factors like the provision of defined benefit pensions, increases in the state pension and strong performance of property prices and investments.

“However, while pensioners are on average better off this hides big discrepancies and across the country there are still many older people who struggle with fixed costs like heating bills. Some universal benefits like a free TV licence for wealthy pensioners do look hard to justify but the government should proceed with caution when it comes to reform of areas like the state pension.

"Some of the factors that have boosted pensioner incomes in recent years like defined benefit pension provision will not last forever as employers increasingly switch to less generous alternatives and any change could have significant consequences in the years to come.”

Inheritance, council and property taxes

The committee also makes recommendations for changes to council tax, inheritance tax and other property taxes such as stamp duty.

The report accuses council tax of being an "incoherent combination of a property tax and a service charge." It recommends council tax more closely reflect property values than it currently does, plus a system that allows those with high property values but low incomes to delay payment until the sale of a property. 

It also says second homes should be subject to pay a full rate of local tax.

Stamp duty has "seriously distorted" the housing market according to the committee. It calls on the government to review the system and its effect on housing market liquidity, and consider how it can be reformed to improve housing choices and availability for young families. 

Finally, the report accuses inheritance tax of being "capricious" and unfit for purpose. It recommends reviewing whether and how assets should be taxed on death or transfer to ensure greate intergenerational fairness.


In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

No doubt Joe public who pay income tax, national insurance, and every other tax at source, are feeling really fed up with “ The Lords, Members of parliament ,and every other affluent person in the UK who has money and power telling us what ‘they “ are going to do, as they run the future and our lives. ,How about we start from the top and work our way down to Joe public. Each Lord in the House of Lords, is entitled to £300:00 each time they put in an appearance in this chamber, plus they get a meal for around £4.00 in the restaurant in this chamber, which is supplemented by the tax payer, when the same meal in a restaurant in central London would cost at least £10.00 maybe more for the tax payer. I could go on for a long time here with examples and reasons why said Lords and rich members of Parliament, should be penalised, as Joe public is, with second homes in London, and not a hotel or B&B, as the rest of the population might use. Their expenses, which Joe public would not be allowed to claim. Why are the people That I have mentioned so special? What would happen if at the polls all of these MP’s / government were not voted for again?Can a body ofTax payers bring about a vote to do away with the House ofLords?I invite your comments.........?

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

Here we go again, chaired by this 'never worked for a living' peer advocating doing away with all the benefits that Pensioners have achieved by parliament legislation. This person has always been a political animal, has never worked in the real world, and has been criticised in the past for his outspoken comments as Leader of Richmond Council. Before advocating a reduction in Old Age Pension Pensions he should look a lot closer to Home. 445 Lords claimed more than the average take home pay of full time employees during the 2016/17 session amounting to over £19 million despite the house only sitting for 141 days! 22 New Peers have joined the trough since December 2018 at an estimated cost of £1.8 million and there are now almost 800 members, none of whom have been elected, all appointed by their cronies in the Hoses of Parliament, which incidentally only has 650 members. Figures for last year showed the average peer cost the taxpayer £83000 with £67.9 paying for 814 members. And these people are advocating reducing Pension Benefits when they can turn up for as little as 45 minutes, as many of them do, enjoying a £300 tax free daily allowance without as much as speaking.A parliamentary report called for the Lords to be reduced to a cap of of 600 members over 11 years but as some leave more are appointed. Think how much money could go to deserving causes, such as the NHS, if we did away with this unelected, archaic and undemocratic body of, in the main, ex politicians and cronies of existing ones.

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

Why don't their Lordships forego their £300 per day bonus. Cheeky Tory bastards, I don't get £450 per week, and the £14 per month private pension I receive is taken away by everyone but me and it stops me getting dental and optical benefits. Scumbags the lot of them, the French have the right idea they put the lazy scrounging expenses fiddling clown in their place.

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

So out of touch with real people. I definitely won't have anything near that income, even tho I paid into a pension scheme for many years. I am a divorced woman and wasn't allowed to join the final salary scheme as I worked part time when I was married and looking after our children. Now people can't get full time hours so again, this will affect their pensions. Most people I know who continue to work beyond pension age, do it because they can't afford to live on their pension. One of the main reasons for the winter fuel payment was due to pensioners dying from hypothermia because they couldn't afford to heat their homes. With the ever increasing cost of fuel these days, we don't ever want to go back to a system of choosing to eat or heat. We could introduce a system where pensioners could refuse the payment, on an annual basis, if they wished. This would be with the proviso that the money would go directly into a special fund to help others. For example for emergency grants (that would not affect benefits.) Whatever, they know that there would be many people who would not apply because they are too proud, don't know they may be entitled, know it exists or simply don't have the skills to apply. If we are lucky to live long enough, we will all become pensioners one day. But what this committee is suggesting is to turn back the clock on progress and it will be the younger generations that will pay the price as they have to wait longer.I wonder who's done a risk assessment on how working longer will impact on people's health and whether this will impact on life expectancy.

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

Funny how people with more money always seem to think that the less well off can manage on even less

In reply to by Maureen Newman (not verified)

I agree, its the same thing all the time the rich politicians who Squirrel away there wealth that we actually give them in the first place.There money is in tax exempt off shore banks.The Lords is just an excuse of an old peoples home which incidentally they will never have to suffer.They F**k everything up and we have to pay for it.

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

What on earth is going on im 65 we are the generation who have paid tax ,NIC all our working lives ,high mortgage repayment TAXED at 15% in the 70s,80 etc the list goes on it was a struggle to keep a home ,pay bills then and now entering our senior years ,The government are wanting to continue and penalise us more .There are an awful.lot of younger people who don.t want to work and just claim benefits and see it as there right to do so ,i can go on but this latest report by the lords committee is just totally unfair it won.t concern them one bit as they are wealthy anyway .Sort out brexit get the country together and leave the people who are entitled to a decent living in retirement having paid there dues alone .

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

How much do peers get for just signing in at the House of Lords?,! Do they think that preparing for retirement by the ordinary working man is easy. They seem to have lost touch with reality. The person responsible for the massive increase in the retirement age has since took early retirement and received a massive pension to boot.DO THEY THINK WE ARE ALL AS WEALTHY AS THIS? What a farce.

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

Typical of an unelected body of old fogies who get £300 a day, for just turning up at the Lords!!! I'd like to see how they would fare on a pension of less than £14,000 per annum!!

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

How about axing the undemocratic house of Lord's. Save a nice bit then, greedy self important people.

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

After working and paying my taxes for taxes years.My state pension will be 5.5 years later how unfair is that so I have been looking forward to a free bus pass and future fuel payments not all of us are as well of as those MPs i n house of lords and commons

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

I think the best thing is to disband the house of lords.How much do they get again for turning up.Leave our pensioners alone.They struggle enough.Most have worked long and hard enough.They ha e earnt their free bus passes.Their free TV licence and anything else they get

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

I'm 60, struggling to keep working with severe debilitating arthritis and looking after elderly parents to avoid them entering the care home. Financially, I'm also supporting millennial children. I looked forward to retiring but everytime I get a little closer the goalposts move further away. Always worked, never had benefits or any help ever. The Government can just shove this up their Jackseat! Gonna go for everything I can now, fed up with toeing the line, doing the right thing, being flogged to death and taken for a ride. Good luck Government, the Boomers are not the Silent generation you could walk over .

In reply to by Jane Hardcastle (not verified)

Peers get £300, tax free, for signing on and staying 45 minutes. Their average take home pay is more than £83,000 for being there, I won’t say working, for an average 141 days per year. By the way, there are approx. 800 peers which is more than the Commons and increases yearly even though it is supposed to be decreasing.

In reply to by Sheila Gibson (not verified)

Don't forget to mention the 300 pounds is TAX FREE are they aware we pay tax on our state pensions.

In reply to by Brian Hubbard (not verified)

must agree with all you said needs reforming. Undemocratic ,who voted forThese free loading people.

In reply to by Billious (not verified)

There are nearly as many cheeky Labour bastards with their noses in the trough in the House of Lords as there are Torys. There are in fact 247 Tory, 185 Labour and 95 Lib Dems with an additional 184 Crossbench and a few other making 782 in total.

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

Seems fair in general though I believe pensioners who chose not to have children should be rewarded rather than have to cough up for people who chose to have more than two. Why not just tax each child above a threshold of two?Help save the planet etc.....

In reply to by Pam Stanton (not verified)

A proportion of the population are stuck in low wage jobs and high living costs and any amount of pension planning may not produce much at all when they eventually retire as they simply do not have the spare cash. This is going to become a massive issue for us all as a country. I do feel however that a proportion of other people who make little or no provision at all for their old age should be forced to do so. They may rather spend their money on other things such as expensive holidays , and make the minimum contribution to retirement . It is likely we will all now have to carry them through their retirement because they failed to make any provision.

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

After failing to grasp the 50 years of NI contributions and tax that a person has paid during their life you are now suggesting that every financial benefit they get should now be taxed or removed. Nice way to treat your old folk who built the country. Oh don't forget the cost of long term care which will also rob many elderly people of most of their assets too.

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

Why have you my blog?

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

Your article implies that the bus pass and winter fuel payments would only be paid for five years after reaching pension age.I think the proposal is that they would only COMMENCE (and then presumably be paid until death) five years after pension age.

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

DO THESE PEOPLE IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS AND COMMONS LIVE IN THE REAL WORLD ?I have also worked all my life starting from the age of 15, paying all my taxes, National Insurance Contributions etc I will not receive my state pension, bus pass etc until the age of 66 which takes me 6 years past my original retirement age and now they are trying to take most of the benefits away all together shame on them.reply

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

I have worked since the age of 14. But now have to work longer, pay higher tax and national insurance a TV licence (for what it should be abolished) and find it incredible that a bunch of out dated overpaid fatcats - mainly millionaires are dictating my future. Ridiculous once again the ordinary working person gets hammered to protect the wealthy.

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

Where on earth do the Mr Cameron get £454 per week pension for couples from.My wife and I both get state pension and i can tell you it is not £454 per week it is at least 2 thirds of that.As for National Insurance my wife and I have paid NI for our whole life 46 years till we got our State Pension.These people do not live in the real world with their pension made up by the Government.

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

German pension 4 times as much french pension twice as much what have they in common no house of lords.

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

I don't know which planet these people are on but suggest they try living on a basic state pension for six months before deciding these cuts are a good idea, and make it compulsory during from November to March.

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

As another person has commented....this has to be some kind of April Fool joke supplied by the Lords members - who were so sound asleep that they missed the actual date?!It would be very interesting to submit a Freedom of Information request on the respected Member's own expenses, and see how it compares to our 'intergenerationally imbalanced' weekly freebie 'perks'.I really appreciated the commenter who pointed out that intergenerational financial differences are actually the happy result of having worked hard, paid all income tax and NICs in addition to paying high interest mortgage payments throughout the 70s and 80s to secure our own property.Whatever remains of this valuable asset will (after exorbitant care fees are deducted (naturally...shafted again) ) will be then inherited by the allegedly poor, badly done by younger generation, as portrayed by the current media frenzy.We all need to calm down and open our eyes to this media manipulation. If we want to have a voice in this process, we must find some common ground as a group of humans just going through life together - the young workers will one day be 62 (and counting) too and possibly kicking themselves for backing the removal of these small comforts of their own retirement.The Brexit debacle has been an interesting and tragic puppet show - no political party's manifesto is worth the paper it is printed on (remember George Osbourne and the Triple Lock?) , so maybe we can help the needy ourselves?Take the fuel payments even if you don't need to, and donate the amount to a local cause for those less lucky. Bus passes actually reduce air pollution and parking chaos, and are a huge tick box for the government's carbon footprint reduction, into the bargain. Many other possibilities?Maybe we need a political party for older (and soon to be older) people to actually have a bit of clout, WASPI Women and Backto60 have made an excellent start.Kick these proposals into the ditch, where they belong.

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

I find it alarming that privileged Lords living off large daily expenses and with much bigger incomes than the majority of pensioners can pontificate on the benefits of the elder generation. My small private pension from the NHS increased bt£4.25 per month whist my council tax went up by over £5 and I pay tax on my work pension too. Never mind all of the other increases in cost of living.The Lords should look at the conditions and incomes of the majority of pensioners, not just their own pensions.

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

No mention that these same retirees will pay vast sums in inheritance tax. This was £5.4 BILLION in the year to March 3019. So their lordships consider that this money which has been already taxed should be taxed again at 40% rather than passed to the younger generation (which they claim they are helping with these new proposals!). How much are they going to save for the exchequer from withdrawing free TV licences (This should be pay as you go anyway - the licence system is outdated)? Bus passes could be issued free by the bus companies as part of their operator licence and National Insurance should be incorporated into the income tax system. It is supposed to be ring-fenced for NHS and pensions which it no longer is. As for heating allowance .... the £100 is a drop in the ocean and only relieves part of the tax that we have to pay on energy.- a most basic need. More money would be saved by reducing the number of parliamentary members in both houses of Parliament. The Commons has proved itself unfit for purpose over the last 3 years and the Lords needs to find something more constructive to do and return to its original purpose of being a revising chamber..

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

stealing money of the poor pensioners , most pensioners have only have their state pensions to live on ; members of the house of lords are wealthy .

In reply to by Mr Robin Shugrue (not verified)

Robin you are so right, just like directors of companies they are told of the tree and they still think it's there god dam right to pilfer from the people under them, i.e. dip into the pension pot that has been put into for when people come to the end of their working career, only to find the bosses have embezzled in to it, and what more there is No law to bring them to task.

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

Let's do away with the house of Lords that would save some money overpaid pompous idiots making the poor pay again.I've paid tax and n ins all my life and now your want to make me poorer than I am.

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

I think we could start the reform of the system by getting rid of the second house.What actual use is The House of Lords?It seems to be a retirement home for political "has beens" and "hangers on". There is absolutely no democratic control over its membership.Another thing ripe for reform is the generous (but unfunded) final salary pension scheme enjoyed by MPs.Basically it is underwritten by us the taxpaying general population.It should be closed and replaced with a money purchase scheme like the rest of the population enjoys.It could be regulated by the FCA and therefore have the possibility of going bust just like in the Equitable Life scandal. The government has still only given 22% compensation to the Equitable Life pension savers whose old age was ruined by its inability to appoint competent regulators.For too long have our politicos lectured us on how we must give up our benefits whilst somehow avoiding reform themselves. What political control do we have over Baron True of East Sheen in the County of Surrey who is the Chairman of the Committee which wrote this report? None, I suspect - he is a political placeman and I wonder how many old aged pensioner bus passes we could afford if we funded them from his benefits?Another point, the very benefits and taxes mentioned in this report as "not well targeted", "capricious" "causing distortion" etc are the very benefits and taxes dreamed up by the government of which he was part. The term poacher turned gamekeeper springs to mind...

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

This statement of recommendations typifies how out of touch the outdated House of Lords is.. They completely ignore the fact of how long older people have worked and paid huge taxes for. Not only are we having to wait longer for a State pension and now have free TV licences under threat, they want to delay free Bus passes even further!They are an absolute disgrace and another drain on this country. I am not a communist (quite the opposite), but statements like this make me support shutting down this dated institution .I agree with everyone else here posting like minded comments.... Never give in to these privileged idiots.

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

where can I vote against these idiots.

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

I understand that free bus passes pay for themselves with the increased economic activity that they generate so it would be a really silly thing to do away with them. I am really looking forward to hopefully getting mine in 20 months time having had my state pension age put back for quite a few years. At the moment I never go into Brighton (the nearest conurbation to me) and only go into Eastbourne when they have free parking on a Sunday. It isn't just internet shopping that has affected the high street!

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

Politicians have always been out of touch with the rest of society. Too many of them are arrogant, greedy and full of their own self importance, whilst sticking their snouts in the trough that the rest of us supply. There are a number of taxes in need of critical reform to help make a fairer contribution to the public purse, but there are also many outgoings from that same public purse that need closer scrutiny. I have come to the conclusion that our political leaders are definitely not leaders. They are not where they are to serve the needs of society at all - they simply believe that they deserve to be in charge and to control society, meaning you and me, whilst making as much for themselves as they can in the process. In a nutshell - they are farmers and we are their livestock, doing all the work for our daily ration, while they reap the rewards. Or am I being a bit cynical ?

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

I was very interested in reading this. But what interested me most was that I, who thought I was doing reasonably well, was below average in income! I don't know where the pensioners average income came from, but I don't know anyone who is getting that much a week. In fact most are much lower. The report seems to come from some wholly out of touch idiots with no idea of reality.

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

Well that's quite amazing coming from the Lords, who can, apparently, get about £300 a day for attending, plus expenses, and £150 for just signing in, presumably on their way to either the subsidised bar or the subsidised restaurant. They think £455 a week for a household is too much.I think these people should try living on £455 a week, and then see how they about our benefits.

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

A worrying report from the House of Lords Committee on Intergenerational Fairness and Provision is a major threat to people of my generation and older.I am absolutely flabbergasted by the proposals in this report and find the content shocking. The proposal to abolish the triple lock on the state pension and to introduce NI contributions for those people of pensionable age is, in my opinion, a betrayal of the promises made by previous and current Prime Ministers.On top of this there are also proposals to remove other benefits such as free TV licences for over 75 year olds, free bus passes for those of pensionable age, and winter fuel payments.The changes in pension age, bus pass age and winter fuel allowance age along with changes in the NI rules have already left my wife and I £60,000 worse off.How much more do they want to undermine our generation's retirement that we we have worked, planned and paid for all our lives?

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

House of Lords should be called money for nothing.

In reply to by steve (not verified)

Hit the nail on the head there!!

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

'Lords should lose their £300/ day for turning up in in such an outdated system of government' says retiree. (Me) I've worked all my life, never got a penny from the sate other than child benefit for our two children a loooonnng time ago and now this is what we get. Do us all a favour, will you...?

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

What these recommendations fail to consider is that the older generation have already made contributions into the system via tax, National Insurance and private and company pensions, for a longer period of time than the younger generations. As with any "investment", you expect to collect a benefit at the end, not have it taken away because people who have not invested as much are hard up. Saving seems to be a foreign concept to much of the "I want it now" generations, who also benefit from extremely low interest rates for mortgages, loans etc. This was very different for older people buying properties, who had a much thriftier lifestyle because of this.

In reply to by Ian Hope (not verified)

I agree totally, what you are saying why should the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. I think they should try and live on what we get weekly.

In reply to by Brian Hubbard (not verified)

I am truly disgusted that Peers get this sort of money for staying only 45mins. Do they pay the higher tax on this amount I wonder?I wish someone would pay me £300 for staying anywhere for 45 mins.The Pension amount that was quoted in this article, for a couple is completely wrong. You get less pension as a couple than if you stayed unmarried but lived together. I would really love to have £474 per week; I would certainly consider myself rich on that amount !

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

Someone please inform these unelected and confused people that make up the Home for the Bewildered, that April 1st occurred a few weeks ago. These imbeciles would fail any logic test by equating financial shortcomings in the young with the income of the elderly. Certainly, cut back on freedom passes that are not used by the majority of pensioners that drive their own cars. We all know that many global companies are located in the UK for business purposes, that allow tax avoidance schemes, Interesting that these ermine-coated and confused idiots can’t or won’t see the wood for the trees to resolve poverty issues among the young AND a large section of elderly pensioners. To start with, either closing down or significantly reducing membership of the Home for the Bewildered would start to make a dent into reducing poverty in society, a widespread demograph unrelated to age!

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

I think if any party took this committee's remarks and tried to implement them they would never be in power again remember old people vote more than young people that's a fact.Power agi

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

I am 67 and i don't get the higher rate pension, so any ' extras' are welcome. If all pensioners were paid the higher amount that todays new pensioners get, maybe then the Rich Lords could start talking. Until then keep your mouths shut and your hands of what i have worked all my life for.

Add new comment