I work for £6.83 an hour. I have to work every weekend and the company recently stoppped paying time and a half for Sundays. There is no company pension plan. You people need to live in the real world.

"Remember, we have a Tory government which is only interested in destroying all but the life available to the wealthy."

If you have no argument at all, just resort to class hatred.

It has been generally accepted in all parties that public sector pensions are not affordable...the maths above betray the economic illiteracy or the partisan lying of the author. Delta minus see me! 30% of all new money for the NHS went straight into the pension which is unfunded...Think about the cost of 1 in 5 people working in the public sector being born by everyine else. Save this twaddle for the Mirror...Fantasy economics as peddled for the last 13 years...

council worker, stay in your pension, and please don't advise others into making stupid decision.

Dear Retired Tim, 62? hey, must have been paying in quite a bit to retire early... or can teachers get their state pension earlier than mere mortals.
I'm 55 was knackered in 2006 in a very manual low paid job, insurance payouts don't compensate for loss of pension and anyway my condition could be age related so got 18 months basic wage...seen my projected pension drop from £5,400 to £800 want to swap?.

Oh we on benefits still pay rent and community charge, no winter fuel entitlements , no reduced rates.

Cannot feel sorry for you, should have stayed to 65.

"doesn't this mean that the pension for anyone due to get one in the near future has also dropped by 1/4"

Per the interim report (that the chart above is misquoted from), Hutton takes the pay freeze into account, along with the change to CPI. Because the money to pay for it is taken straight from tax revenue, the worrying measure is pensions cost as a proportion of GDP - and that's even worse now, because the GDP growth projections Hutton used have been lowered since the report was published.

http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/d/hutton_pensionsinterim_071010.pdf

The number of young lecturers who are telling me they are dropping out of the TPS means that the taxpayer will have to pick up more of the pension payouts. The TPS is non funded so what I pay in today goes straight to the treasury and is paid out to a retired teachet. The scheme was set up that way, but in the Greater Manchester LGPS this is a funded scheme, with assets of more than £5b than is paid out, it could go on paying out for the next 20 years without another contribution. So the extra contributions will just be sent to the treasury as the employer contribution is cut, to the tune of £900m a year and these are majority low pay workers. In my own case I worked in the private sector for many years before moving into teaching, well this is the first time I have had to contribute to my pension. My old employer an international bank paid my pension contributions about 15% of my salary, which means I will get a bigger pension from the private sector than the public sector which I pay into. Can I thank the taxpayer who through their bank charges over the years small saving rates, high loan credit card rates that have given me a nice pension.

I marched today as I am a 32 year old teacher who has been teaching for eleven years. It fills me with fear to think that I may have work for another 35 years in an ever changing, ever more demanding job. Having had two parent teachers who are both now retired, one due to ms and the other to care for him, I know what this job does, don't get me wrong I love it. I saw someone carrying a placard today- children want to learn about dinosaurs not be taught by them, how true and I know my capabilities as an older teacher will not be the same as younger teachers

coming from tories with rich parents and trust funds ... it`s a bit a rich !! ... pardon the pun

David
30 November 2011 at 13:30.
"The rest of us should not be made to pay for the crimes of the banks"

It was not only the banks. The previous and now economically discredited Labour government that maxed-out the nations credit card, and at a time of unprecedented boom never put away for a rainy day, and let's never forget it was a Labour government that helped destroy many previously well funded private pension schemes, but let's not put facts before a well crafted and heart-felt rant.

Technology has rendered 40% of the public sector surplus to requirements. They can easily be absorbed by the private sector once they have been cured of their attitude problem.

@Brenda: false comparison. Defence is also facing large cuts, and rightly so. But a level of defence spend is unavoidable - unlike, eg, the mass of recently-created "city wardens", who could be sacked without losing any useful service.

"Public sector pension payments peaked at 1.9 per cent of GDP in 2010-11 and will gradually fall over the next fifty years to 1.4 per cent in 2059-60."

But in 2010/11 the government was running a deficit of £155bn. So the government was spending £155 bn more on public services than it was receiving in tax revenue.

Thus, on a long term view, government spending is unaffordable under the current tax regime.

So pensions at 1.9% of GDP are unaffordable. As is education spending, health spending and all other government spending.

To make them affordable needs either a) cuts and/or b) tax rises.

Simon,
The graph in Hutton doesnt assume all the current coalition's proposals are implemented - many of them werent even announced when he did his report!

It does take into account the changes made to the pension schemes in 2007, though, which were done to make them more affordable.

Unions are striking against the changes that the graph above assumes. Are you leaving this fact out on purpose, George, or are you ignorant of it?

When are you 'cerebral' number crunchers, going to mention the simple reality.

PENSIONS ARE PAID FOR BY INVESTED CAPITAL, INVESTED IN ''WEALTH-CREATING'' BUSINESS'S.

BROWN WITH THE AVID HELP OF WALL STREET, ALLOWED THE ''BANKER/FINANCIERS' TO STEAL BILLIONS OF DOLLARS, AND PUT THEM INTO THE 'OVER-SEAS' TAX-HAVEN'S

There is NO MONEY to generate the income needed for pensions'

THE GREEDY AND AVARICIOUS PUBLIC UNIONS, ARE DEMANDING 'TAXPAYERS' CASH, WITH MENACE,

They pay just a notional amount from their 'tax-paid wages, into their pension funds, AND THAT IS ALL

You would if you paid tax, have to SAVE £250,000 AFTER-TAX CASH, AND INVEST IT, TO GET THE SAME PENSION THAT THE

LOCAL-AUTHORITY EMPLOYEES AND THEIR GOLD-HANDSHAKES WALK AWAY WITH.

How many of YOU, private tax-payers, have saved £250,000 and invested it.

HANDS UP, LETS SEE WHO YOU ARE.

CIVIL-SERVANTS, HERE'S A NEWS-FLASH,

THE COUNTRY CAN NO LONGER AFFORD THE CASH AND PROMISES, YOUR UNIONS EXTORTED OUT OF THE 13 YEARS OF BLAIR/BROWN SOCIALIST GOVERNMENT

go and get a job in the PRIVATE-SECTOR, I'M SURE YOUR ''SKILLS'' will be useful there

"The graph in Hutton assumes public sector pension reform, not business as usual."

No it doesn't! It's an assessment of the situation as it currently stands. Another ignoramus with time to waste.

"plan to cap pay rises at 1 per cent means that some workers will have suffer an average 16 per cent pay cut over the next five years. If public sector workers can't go on strike in these circumstances, when can they"... The fundamental difference is it's other workers that pays the piper... Workers who have seen their own pensions stolen their own pay and conditions eroded. So what makes the public-sector a special-case. Or are some workers more equal than others. So far i have seen no support for these strikes on the shop-floor most fully understand Labour is in the pocket of the public-sector unions, and many are resentful it was a Labour government that stole their pensions and undermined their pay and condition with ill-conceived mass-immigration of low cost Labour..

"That is out of context, that graph relates to the massive uncertainties inherent in predicting future public pensions with a variance of around 0.4% by altering only some variables we can therefore not make assumptions as to whether it can remain sustainable."

So why do you think its a feather graph then? Because feather graphs take in all possible variable. DOH!I can't believe the number of dimbos on here today.

mcquade:

"They actually cite the graph to prove current pension spending is affordable."

All that graph shows is that as a percentage of GDP the cost of public sector pensions is (probably) falling from its 2010 level.

That doesn't mean that the pensions are affordable.

The pensions weren't affordable in 2010. That's one of the reasons why the government was running a £155bn deficit.

mcquade: Other workers know all about affordable pensions, well we did until Gordon Brown stole them. Why should one worker pay more into the pension-pot of another, more than they can pay into his/her own. mcquade your a Labour party apologist what's Labour's plan going to be to end this existing appalling inequality in pension provision, and what's the justification for the continuance of the statuesque? Please don't refer to this ridiculous graph. 'projected' 2039/40 2059/60. that's not a projection in these volatile times it's bloody witchcraft

mcquade "No it doesn't! "

Of course it does. It assumes uprating in line with CPI, which the unions oppose.

The report says: "Future costs are inherently uncertain and sensitive to assumptions on life expectancy,
size of workforce, earnings growth and the implementation of reforms." Not that they are "affordable".

The report is at http://cdn.hm-treasury.gov.uk/hutton_final_100311.pdf, should you wish to review it before dismissing as "dimbo" everyone that hasn't swallowed the propaganda. What it says at 1.5 and 1.6 ought to disturb you.

city wardens?

There is no need for any public sector worker to worry about the new proposed increases in the cost of the pension as all you have to do is come out of the scheme. This will save you up to 6% of your wages and give you a much needed increase in your take home pay. If you have only just started paying into a scheme this is even better as when you finally retire, if you are still alive you works pension will be non existant and you will get the state pension only, then you can claim for all the extra benfits that the private sector who have not joined a scheme will get. you will not starve but you will just about exist. and don't forget to get rid of your house so when you have to go into a home everything will be paid for by the government just like the private sector people who did not join a pension scheme and wined and dined themselves on the money they saved by not being in a pension scheme .
Of greater importance is the fact that the bankers and the government will loose out on billions of pounds of investment capital which will no longer be provided every month by all the public sector workers paying into a pension scheme. So come on all you public sector workers come out of the schemes collapse the pension fund you are in and increase your take home pay now and enjoy your life now whilst you still can and don't save up for the rainy day, as the government and the investment bankers who use your pension capital to are making hay while the sun shines are using your money to provide their income to fund their pension schemes. GET OUT OF THE PENSION SCHEME NOW WHILST YOU CAN AND HAVE A GOOD AND HAPPY WORKING LIFE WITH THE EXTRA MONEY YOU SAVE. Then let us see how far the government gets with no regular monthly income.
Whilst I am on, why if we now only have to pay NI for 30 years to get a full state pension are we still paying the same amount of NI after the 30 years required, and why is it that all the people who invested in a private pension and opted out of SERPS are now going to loose the 1.4% discount and 3% employer discount for NI contributions without getting an increase in the basic state pension that was paid to people who paid SERPS.
The money is better in the private sector, and if you are in the private sector and your money is not good then you are
(1)in the wrong job,
(2)have not got the qualifications to get more money
(3)being taken for a sucker

You are preaching Luddite, your that pompous.