Posts Tagged ‘retirement’

Fear of pension crisis grows as workers raid savings

Wednesday, June 10th, 2009

Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2009/jun/10/hsbc-pensions-survey

International survey suggests more than 20% are dipping into nest-eggs to pay down debt

More than 20% of the world’s workers have dipped into their savings to pay down debt and 13% have stopped saving altogether, according to a study of retirement trends over the past year.

In Britain, China, India and the US, the study suggests, savings have taken a back seat to maintaining living standards threatened by the global downturn.

According to research by HSBC, almost nine out of 10 people feel they are unprepared for retirement, and three-quarters do not know what income they can expect when they stop working.

Even in countries where the population is relatively young, there is a degree of panic among legislators keen to prepare for the day when over-65s outnumber schoolchildren. According to HSBC’s head of insurance, Clive Bannister, China is drafting plans for a nationwide scheme based on an occupational pension model established in Hong Kong. At the moment, most Chinese workers fall outside the limited number of occupational schemes and must rely for a retirement income on younger family members or their own small savings.

Last year, Britain reached the point at which 65-year-olds outnumbered 16-year-olds.

Bannister said the report, which was based on interviews with 15,000 people in 15 countries, showed there was a “downturn deficit” that the state alone could not solve. He said: “the recession means that people are worrying more about surviving from day-to-day than they are concerned about the future”.

He added that the situation in fast-growing economies such as India and China was more difficult. “We can see the state retreating across the globe as the number of older people increases quite dramatically. There simply won’t be enough workers to support a retired population through taxation. In emerging economies, falling state benefits means that, more than elsewhere, individuals must look after themselves.”

The last six months has seen a severe downturn in projections for retirement savings after a torrid two years for world stock markets and steep declines in interest rates. The problem is compounded by increases in life expectancy in most countries that mean pension planning must be extended to cope with a longer retirement.

Several countries, including Britain, have sought to raise the retirement age, but the burden of working longer has, in the main, been shifted by the current generation of over-50s to younger workers.

Previous HSBC studies have shown that workers from China to Britain expect to work beyond the age when they receive state pensions. But while many workers will remain fit enough to keep working into their 70s, others will find that they are unable to carry on and could fall into poverty.

The reluctance to save in the downturn adds to the “unpreparedness gap” being felt in every major economy, the bank said.

Stephen Green, the bank’s chairman, said: “A perfect storm is confronting pensions planning, created by an ageing population, falling pension fund values, a drop in state and employer contributions and an economic downturn which is forcing people to make financial choices.”

Green wants governments to support education schemes and financial advice centres for workers to make informed choices about their retirement planning.

  • Pensions
  • Occupational pensions
  • State pensions
  • Financial crisis
  • Global recession
  • HSBC
guardian.co.uk ? Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Government faces heat on fuel poverty

Tuesday, June 9th, 2009

Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2009/jun/10/fuel-poverty-energy

Select committee claims ministers are failing millions of vulnerable families and demands urgent action on fuel poverty

The government was today urged to offer more help to the millions of families in fuel poverty due to rising energy prices.

The Environment, Food and Rural Affairs select committee said ministers had failed to meet statutory obligations to end fuel poverty and called on them to set up an action plan to help people struggling with energy bills as a matter of urgency.

It warned the resources available for tackling fuel poverty were “inadequate and getting worse”. Anyone spending at least 10% of their income on heating and lighting their home is deemed to be living in fuel poverty. In a series of recommendations, the select committee called for the winter fuel payment to be no longer given to people paying higher-rate tax. Instead it wants the money to fund energy efficiency programmes aimed at helping the fuel poor and vulnerable households.

It also called on the government to consolidate its range of energy efficiency programmes into one comprehensive scheme to upgrade all homes in England, with the improvements delivered by local authorities.

Committee chairman Michael Jack, said: “We need action and clarity – not further consultation – to tackle the three elements that drive fuel poverty: prices, income and energy efficiency levels.

“The government must act swiftly to bring forward practical measures before next winter, using technologies that are already well understood, to help the millions of households that remain in fuel poverty.”

The committee said the Warm Front programme, the government’s main scheme to help vulnerable households cut their energy bills, should have its budget increased and that it should be extended to include all hard-to-treat properties.

It recommended a central budget be created into which energy companies pay their carbon emissions reduction target contributions, so the cash could be pooled with money from other programmes to fund home upgrades.

Energy regulator Ofgem should be ordered to ensure energy companies tell customers about social tariffs and who is eligible for them, to help increase competition for certain customers, such as those who use pre-payment meters, it said.

Jonathan Stearn, energy expert for Consumer Focus, said it was “outrageous” that there were still more than 5 million vulnerable households struggling to afford to heat and power their homes.

He added: “The government’s energy efficiency schemes are simply not up to scratch. Immediate investment is needed in a radical and co-ordinated action plan if we are to lift millions of the poorest pensioners, families and disabled people out of fuel poverty and cut carbon emissions.”

Michelle Mitchell, charity director for Age Concern and Help the Aged, said: “The report sounds a loud wake-up call for the government, whose strategy to tackle fuel poverty is miles away from reaching its targets.

“Ministers should immediately set out to implement the committee’s recommendations, reviewing the Warm Front Scheme and producing a new ‘road map’ to bring home a more ambitious energy efficiency plan.

“Focusing the winter fuel payment on fuel-poor households could give an edge to the government’s strategy to tackle fuel poverty, as long as the system required to implement it is simple and workable.”

Campaigners say the number of householders in fuel poverty has been one of Labour’s greatest failures. In March last year, its own advisers, the Fuel Poverty Advisory Group, said the government appeared to have given up trying to hit its legally binding target to reduce fuel poverty. The group criticised ministers for cutting the grants programme aimed at those in fuel poverty by a quarter during the comprehensive spending review.

This, it said, was despite the Treasury receiving significantly higher VAT receipts on the back of gas and electricity prices which have doubled in recent years.

  • Energy bills
  • Household bills
  • Poverty
  • Consumer affairs
guardian.co.uk ? Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Social care system is a ‘ticking timebomb’

Thursday, May 28th, 2009

• Half of people want social care provided by professional staff
• Only 4% think they should have to pay for social care services

Two thirds of people would be reluctant to have their relatives provide voluntary care for them in old age, but more than half feel they should not have to contribute towards professional care for their older relatives, according to research published today.

The contradiction in families’ expectations amounts to a “ticking timebomb”, according to the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) and PricewaterhouseCoopers, who commissioned the report in advance of the publication of a government green paper on social care next month.

The research exposes a lack of awareness about social care, confusion about how services are funded, and a widespread lack of preparation or planning for future care needs. Only 4% of the 2,000 people questioned believed individuals should be expected to contribute to the cost of their parents’ or other relatives’ care, while only 14% thought a contribution reasonable if means-tested. More than half felt they should not be compelled to pay for their parents’ care.

The research found this reluctance grew with age, with 67% of those aged 55 or above, and 72% of those aged 70 and above, thinking people should not have to pay for their parents’ care.

But at the same time, the majority of those questioned rejected the idea of being looked after by unpaid family members or friends. Almost half would prefer their own care needs, including personal care, are met by professional care staff (45%), 21% would prefer friends or family being paid to assist them, and only 17% would choose friends or family helping voluntarily.

The preference for professional staff was significantly higher among men than women, and among those who are financially better off. People from black and minority ethnic backgrounds were generally more willing to contribute to care costs for relatives and more enthusiastic about having relatives provide care instead of a professional service.

Care confusion

Regardless of the reluctance to pay for care or accept free help from their family, most people are confused and uncertain about how care services are funded and the degree of individual contribution involved.

The majority (69%) of the people questioned do not feel well enough informed about these services and the financial implications they have for themselves and their family.

Carey Oppenheim, co-director of the IPPR, said: “Future policy changes relating to social care must be shaped by an informed public debate. Our research shows that there is confusion about existing provision and a substantial gap between public expectations and social care realities.?

“Government urgently needs to address this disconnect before it brings forward policy proposals that seek to fundamentally reform the social contract between the state and its citizens.”

The report’s findings support earlier research by Norwich Union, which found 71% of adult Britons were worried about how they would manage financially if they had to support their parents through retirement, while 21% were worried they would have to support both their parents and their children at the same time.

More than a third worry they will have to live without luxuries in order to provide additional financial support for their parents, while 13% worry they will have to cut back on their working hours.

Despite these fears, 22% of people have no idea how their parents plan to fund their retirement and 41% feel uncomfortable asking their parents questions about their finances.

  • Paying for long-term care
  • Family finances
  • Long-term care
guardian.co.uk ? Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds