The stupendous cost to the Treasury of generous publicsector pensions

SIR – Eve Wilson (Letters, June 26), a retired headteacher, generously makes the point that she does not need the very large pension increase which will be awarded to most if not all publicservice pensioners on the occasion of the next review. I don’t begrudge her the windfall – it is only seeking to keep pace with inflation. The comparisons with less protected retirees, however, is alarming.

I am fortunate to be in receipt of a final-salary pension but, at best, I can expect one half of it to cover inflation up to a maximum of 5 per cent; the other half receives no increases at all, my employer having been unable to meet the cost of continuing a discretionary increase of up to 3 per cent per annum on pre-1997 service.

I served for 20 years as a trustee of my employer’s pension scheme and know only too well the staggering cost of purchasing annuities to fund even minimum annual increments. It appears that public-service pensions have no upper incremental limits, something which no private sector employee can even dream of.

Public servants enjoy virtually total job protection during their working lives and need have no financial worries in retirement, either. In my experience, those happy recipients of taxpayers’ largesse – be they teachers, local authority employees or servants of the Crown – have very little understanding of just how generous are their terms of employment.

The cost to the Treasury is stupendous and surely must be a prime candidate for a “levelling-up” review – though “levelling-down” might be more sensible.

Alan Quinton

Eastbourne, East Sussex

SIR – It’s nice to hear that public-sector pensioners are to receive an extra £2,000 (Letters, June 26).

I’m in a defined benefit company pension scheme, but 50 per cent of my pension is subject to a rise at the whim of the company. We haven’t had a penny increase in this portion since 2014. Earlier this year the remainder of my pension gave me a 1.3 per cent increase of less than £20 a month. Different planet.

Keith Appleyard

West Wickham, Kent

SIR – Eve Wilson says she realises some pensioners may struggle, but that the increase the Government has promised is not justified because many more pensioners are wealthy.

However, the state pension triple lock was removed in the last budget, when the Chancellor broke the Conservative manifesto promise to retain it, thus plunging many pensioners into real poverty.

In fact, according to a recent report by the Centre for Ageing Better, there are now more than two million pensioners living in poverty in the UK. This is a shameful figure for one of the world’s wealthiest economies. Add to this the huge rises in the cost of living, especially relating to food and energy, and it is clear that many, probably most, of those two million people will be in danger of hypothermia or malnutrition this winter.

I live in Merseyside in a Red Wall district, where voters who usually vote Labour switched to Conservative because they wanted Brexit completed. These voters trusted the party manifesto and expected to receive an increase in their pensions this year. They have been badly let down by those to whom they gave their support. As a result of this betrayal they will be at least £10 worse off each week (report, June 25).

In this area many pensioners live in real poverty, food banks are overwhelmed by new claimants, many of whom are elderly, and a deteriorating housing stock adds to the burden of energy price rises.

Dr Elizabeth Stewart

Southport, Lancashire