Pension Dispute

[Tom Bowler]

So the independence drum is beating again and we already have one almighty argument about who would be liable to pay the State Pension.

My understanding was that if some one had paid their NI contributions to the UK Government then it would be the UK Government who would pay the pension.


Any NI contributions paid to the Scottish Government after independence would then mean that the SG would pay pension relating to those contributions. This I thought would, in some cases mean that some pensioners would receive a pension in two payments, one from the UK Gov and one from the SG. Eventually the SG would end up paying all of the state pension.


This appears to be what Sturgeon and Blackford think as well. Unfortunately Kate Forbes doesn't seem to know and stated she would not argue with Blackford.


The SNP policy Convenor has thrown some doubt on who would be liable to pay state pension.


It would appear that there is no real clarity on this issue from either the SG or UK Gov. There are many biased opinions on the internet but what the People of Scotland need is clear, truthful and up to date information that is not based on flawed statements that were made before the 2014 referendum.


I wonder how much "clear and truthful" info will be forthcoming. !

[Corky Smeek]

This is just the start of Project Fear part 2 in advance of IndyRef II. It's also distraction behaviour to take the heat off Johnson.

The whole issue of pensions was sorted out quite clearly and unequivocally before IndyRef I. However, if your intention is to prevent independence at any cost then resurrecting a lie to sow a seed of worry is a pretty standard way to go about it.

The extract below is from Paul Kavanagh's blog of 4 February 2022.


On 7 May 2014, the then UK pensions minister Steve Webb told the Scottish Affairs Committee in the House of Commons that older people would be entitled to continue receiving the current state pension even in an independent Scotland. He acknowledged that there would have to be a negotiation between Holyrood and Westminster about how these pensions would be administered, but assured the committee that Westminster would continue to have an obligation to pay the pensions to existing pensioners. When asked by a Labour MP if the pensions of existing pensioners would be secure following a Yes vote, Steve Webb confirmed that this was the case, saying “Yes, they have accumulated rights into the UK system, under the UK system’s rules.”

Then he added, “Take a Scottish person who works all their life and then retires to France… they still have an accumulated pension right in respect of the National Insurance they have paid in when they were part of the United Kingdom.”


Please know that this is a quite wilful attempt by the Tories to deceive the Scottish people. They and the other nay-saying parties used fear to spread doubt prior to
IndyRef I. Do not let them away with it this time around.

Remember the old proverb, - "fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me".

[Tom Bowler]

Below is a link which may give some insight in to the complexity of pensions post independence.

I note that Steve Webb is rowing back so fast from what he said years ago he is likely to win a gold medal.

I am not interested in project fear etc, just who will end up paying the state pension post independence and how it will be done.

It would seem that what was said years ago will count for nothing and that the SG will be liable to pay the state pension and to negotiate the liabilities and assets as best it can. If the Tories are still in power for those negotiations they will attempt to punish Scotland in the same way that the EU keep trying to punish the UK Government.

Who pays the State Pension in an independent Scotland? | FAI (fraserofallander.org)

[The Horseman]

Corky…In your highlighted Para, it says that PENSIONS WILL BE PAID TO EXISTING PENSIONERS!
I would say there is ‘big hole’ there……Nothing about ‘future pensioners’!
Just a Thot!
Is this another..’Here we go again’?

[Corky Smeek]

Honestly Horseman, I could compile a reply and back it up with evidence. However, past experience shows that you just ignore it and provide us with the next chapter of "The world according to Horseman" which rarely, if ever, has any evidential substance.

In any case I just don't have time to do a full reply. I'm far too busy digging a fall-out shelter in my back garden in preparation for WWIII.

[Fulmar]

I hope you've got your thermals on Corky.
It is surely a legitimate question to ask about pensions and who will pay those set to retire in the future and from what I can see, this is not something that is settled at all.

[The Horseman]

Honestly Horseman, I could compile a reply and back it up with evidence. However, past experience shows that you just ignore it and provide us with the next chapter of "The world according to Horseman" which rarely, if ever, has any evidential substance.

In any case I just don't have time to do a full reply. I'm far too busy digging a fall-out shelter in my back garden in preparation for WWIII.

There is very ‘specific’ wording in that Statement. It is called ‘Word Smithing’.
When one sees the care that has been taken in preparing an exact and precise message like that, one should question it!
BTW…I did work in Gov’t for some time, and that is why Legislation is very time consuming, maybe too much so, but that wording ‘does not include’ anything in the future!

And Evidence was my ‘forte’! I practiced it for 35 years, both in the UK and North America.
I would hate to see you ‘outsmarted’!