All would pay more under Lowe amendment

Tuesday 21st July 2009, 2:29PM BST.

EMPLOYEES would also pay a higher rate of social security under an amendment proposed by Mary Lowe.

The former department minister wants to keep the pension age at 65.

Proposals announced by Social Security to ensure the sustainability of the funds it manages would see the pension age rise to 67, with employers’ contribution rates also increasing by 0.5%.

But Deputy Lowe said yesterday evening that she believed she had come up with a solution to keep the pension age at 65.

‘To make it fair to all, the proposed amendment would raise contribution rates by 0.6% for employees, self-employed and non-employed and to raise the recommended increase from SSD for employers from 0.5% to 0.6%.’

She said many would prefer to pay more in contributions than see the pension age rise.

The amendment has been seconded by Deputy Scott Ogier, a member of Social Security.

To read Guernsey Press stories in full click here for subscription details. Individual editions are now available online.

1
FedUp

July 21, 2009 at 6:53 pm

For goodness sake, when is SOMEBODY going to mention something about CUTTING BENEFITS?? This would solve the vast majority of the problems – also, what about removing family allowance from all of those lazy so and sos who are already receiving benefits – isn’t that what the benefits are for?? Plus they don’t have to pay for school uniforms, dentists, etc for their children, unlike the rest of the hard-working population who do.

It’s simple – get the scroungers back to work, or substantially cut their benefits. Surely I’m not the only one fed up about this…..

Report abuse
2
Arnald

July 22, 2009 at 9:51 am

How will it help, what jobs will they go to and how much will it save?

The only way out of this is to either give sufficient tax breaks to small local business or for the States to create jobs.

Either way it will cost more than just maintaining this not-ideal situation.

The demand is out there for all manner of services, we just need to set up the investment. Instead of being fed up with that, why not say “tax the richest and invest in jobs and education”.

Oh, and put the Daily Mail down.

Report abuse
3
Dave

July 22, 2009 at 11:41 am

I agree with FedUp.

If you havent paid in you shouldnt get anything out. Just like any insurance policy.

In fact, originally, that is what it was set up to be, States Insurance.

Plus, why not get the unemployed, if they are fit enough to do work around the Island, for the good of the Island.

Report abuse
4
bruce

July 23, 2009 at 10:22 am

I agree 100% with fedup but nothing will be done they just keep having more and more kids to push there family allowance up

Report abuse
5
CheesedOff

July 23, 2009 at 1:03 pm

Arnald you need to get a grip and open your eyes! Most, not all, of the people on benefits are abusing the system. They either keep having kids or decide not to work because they get paid more on benefits/the dole than they would working.

FedUp and Bruce are spot on and Dave is right -you shouldn’t get anything if you don’t bother to contribute.

Why should the rest of us hard workers have to support the scroungers? Cut their benefits so they HAVE to work. It’s hardly rocket science.

Report abuse