Motion
Abandon Plan to Increase the State Pension Age
S6M-02665 · Standard Motion · lodged by McNeill, Pauline
Lodged on
21 Dec 2021Heard / answered on
UnknownThat the Parliament notes research carried out by pension consultants LLP, which, it believes, has cast doubt on the UK Government’s timetable for extending the state pension age; understands that the research shows that the life expectancy figures, which current increases are based on, are no longer accurate and that the century-long trend of increasing life expectancy has stagnated and is now in decline, in comparison to the estimates made in 2014; further understands that the research points to fears that the long-term impact of the COVID-19 pandemic would put further pressure on life expectancy rates; believes that the new life expectancy data fatally undermines the case for extending the state pension age; considers that it would be an appalling injustice to force people to work until their late 60s, when the evidence suggests no equivalent rise in life expectancy; believes that, for many people working in physically-demanding jobs, or experiencing age-related illness, such an extension of their working life is impossible, and urges the UK Government to take this new information into account, to prioritise treating elderly people with dignity and respect, and to abandon its plans to increase the state pension age.
Backed by
Supported by 10 additional MSPs
SNP 6
Lab 4
Lodged by
McNeill, Pauline
(Scottish Labour).
- Adam, Karen (SNP)
- Beattie, Colin (SNP)
- Boyack, Sarah (Lab)
- Gibson, Kenneth (SNP)
- Hyslop, Fiona (SNP)
- Kidd, Bill (SNP)
- Maguire, Ruth (SNP)
- Rowley, Alex (Lab)
- Sweeney, Paul (Lab)
- Villalba, Mercedes (Lab)
No division on record.
Either the chamber agreed this motion without a vote, it was withdrawn before debate, or it predates 2011 — vote-by-vote records only run from then.
Computer-generated best guess
Possible final motion text as originally lodged
This is a computer’s best guess at applying carried amendments to the original motion text. It uses simple text rules for phrases such as “insert at end”, “after X insert Y”, and “leave out from X to end and insert Y”. Treat it as an aid, not the official motion text.
That the Parliament notes research carried out by pension consultants LLP, which, it believes, has cast doubt on the UK Government’s timetable for extending the state pension age; understands that the research shows that the life expectancy figures, which current increases are based on, are no longer accurate and that the century-long trend of increasing life expectancy has stagnated and is now in decline, in comparison to the estimates made in 2014; further understands that the research points to fears that the long-term impact of the COVID-19 pandemic would put further pressure on life expectancy rates; believes that the new life expectancy data fatally undermines the case for extending the state pension age; considers that it would be an appalling injustice to force people to work until their late 60s, when the evidence suggests no equivalent rise in life expectancy; believes that, for many people working in physically-demanding jobs, or experiencing age-related illness, such an extension of their working life is impossible, and urges the UK Government to take this new information into account, to prioritise treating elderly people with dignity and respect, and to abandon its plans to increase the state pension age.
Amendments and how the chamber decided
-
S6M-02665Selected item21 Dec 2021 · Standard Motion · McNeill, PaulineThat the Parliament notes research carried out by pension consultants LLP, which, it believes, has cast doubt on the UK Government’s timetable for extending the state pension age; understands that the research shows that the life expectancy figures, which current increases are based on, are no longer accurate and that the century-long trend of incre...