DWP urged to give early State Pension access to people with a terminal illness
Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) MP Jim Shannon has urged the UK Government to consider the 'potential merits of allowing early State Pension access for people with a terminal illness'. However, Pensions Minister Torsten Bell explained that the State Pension can only be accessed when someone reaches the official age of retirement, which is currently 66.
In a written response to the Strangford MP, Mr Bell highlighted that people nearing the end of their life can gain faster access to financial support from the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) through the 'Special Rules for End of Life'. You can find out more about this on GOV.UK here.
He explained: 'This enables people nearing the end of their lives to get faster, easier access to certain benefits, without needing to attend a medical assessment, serve waiting periods and in most cases, receive the highest rate of benefit.'
In the written response earlier this week, the Pensions Minister said: 'There has been no recent assessment. The principle of having a State Pension age that is the same for everybody has the merit of simplicity and clarity through providing an important trigger moment for planning purposes. It has always been the case that nobody can claim their State Pension before they reach their State Pension age.
'For those nearing the end of their life, the Government's priority is to provide people with financial support quickly and compassionately. The main way the Department does this is through the Special Rules for End of Life.
'These enable people who are nearing the end of their lives to get faster, easier access to certain benefits, without needing to attend a medical assessment, serve waiting periods and in most cases, receive the highest rate of benefit.'
These rules apply to five benefits that support people with health conditions or disabilities:
Personal Independence Payment (PIP)
Disability Living Allowance (DLA)
Attendance Allowance
Universal Credit
Employment and Support Allowance (ESA)
Online petition calling for early access to State Pension
A new online petition is urging the UK Government to give older people on disability benefits early access to their State Pension. The State Pension age is currently 66 for both men and women, but is set to rise to 67 between 2026 and 2028.
Petition creator George Bolgar has put forward a proposal that every person over 60 with a disability 'who has been unemployed for at least five years should be given the choice to retire and claim the State Pension immediately'.
The 'allow elderly disabled people to claim the State Pension early' petition has been posted on the Petitions Parliament website.
At 10,000 signatures of support it would be entitled to a written response from the UK Government, at 100,000, it would be considered by the Petitions Committee for debate in Parliament.
The petition states: 'We think that any disabled person aged 60 who has been unemployed for at least five years should be given the choice to retire and claim the State Pension immediately.
'We think that keeping people on the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) unemployment list when there is no chance of them ever becoming employed again is extra work for the DWP and extra stress for the disabled person.
'We think that once someone is above 60 years old and unemployed their likelihood of being employable is extremely reduced.'
State Pension age rise
The State Pension age is set to start rising from 66 to 67 next year, with the increase due to be completed for all men and women across the UK by 2028.
The planned change to the official age of retirement has been in legislation since 2014 with a further rise from 67 to 68 set to be implemented between 2044 and 2046.
The Pensions Act 2014 brought the increase in the State Pension age from 66 to 67 forward by eight years. The UK Government also changed the way in which the increase in State Pension age is phased so rather than reaching State Pension age on a specific date, people born between March 6, 1961 and April 5, 1977 will be able to claim the State Pension once they reach 67.
It's important to be aware of these upcoming changes now, especially if you have a retirement plan in place. Everyone affected by changes to their State Pension age will receive a letter from the DWP well in advance.
Under the Pensions Act 2007 the State Pension age for men and women will increase from 67 to 68 between 2044 and 2046.
The Pensions Act 2014 provides for a regular review of the State Pension age, at least once every five years. The review will be based around the idea people should be able to spend a certain proportion of their adult life drawing a State Pension.
A review of the planned rise to 68 is due before the end of this decade and had originally been scheduled by the then Conservative government to take place two years after the general election - which would have been 2026.
Any review of the State Pension age will take into account life expectancy along with a range of other factors relevant to setting the State Pension age.
After the review has reported, the UK Government may then choose to bring forward changes to the State Pension age. However, any proposals would have to go through Parliament before becoming law.
Check your State Pension age online
Your State Pension age is the earliest age you can start receiving your State Pension. It may be different to the age you can get a workplace or personal pension.
Anyone of any age can use the online tool at GOV.UK to check their State Pension age, which can be an essential part of planning your retirement.
You can use the State Pension age tool to check:
When you will reach State Pension age
Your Pension Credit qualifying age
When you will be eligible for free bus travel - this is at age 60 in Scotland
Check your State Pension age online here.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
15 minutes ago
- The Guardian
To Starmer, his achievements are obvious. As a thought experiment, let's see things through his eyes
He doesn't look like the innovative type, but Keir Starmer is staging a radical experiment. He is testing out a theory of politics a matter of months after it was seemingly – and spectacularly – disproved and, in the process, hoping to pull off a turnaround that would constitute a comeback so stunning it would be closer to a resurrection. The theory in question is that if you deliver practical improvements to the lives of voters, they will reward you at the ballot box. Its guiding principle is 'show, don't tell', with the emphasis on results rather than talk, pragmatism rather than ideology. He's not the first to try it: this was also the animating creed of Joe Biden's presidency – and we know how that worked out. So far the approach seems to be bearing similarly sour fruit in Britain. As Starmer marks one year since his landslide victory, Labour has suffered the biggest post-election drop in public approval since the Conservatives were tanked by Black Wednesday in 1992. The prime minister's personal numbers are the lowest ever recorded for a PM 12 months in: his net approval stands at -54 points. At the equivalent moment in October 2023, Rishi Sunak scored -37. No one has ever come back up from such depths. The PM appears unfazed by all this. It's not that he insists he knows how to climb out of the current hole; rather, he refuses to accept he or his government are in a hole at all. He has a list of first-year achievements he is proud of and, besides, he believes he was written off once before, early in his spell as leader of the opposition – only to plough on, methodically reaching each of the milestones he had set himself and, finally, to win. By way of an anniversary gift, let's assess Starmer as he wants to be assessed. Let's put aside the various missteps of the past year as 'noises off', or as the mere teething pains of a new government. Let us look past both the fiasco of this week's near-defeat on welfare, staved off only by a series of panicked concessions and U-turns, and last summer's baffling determination to strangle at birth any feelgood factor that may have greeted the ejection of a despised Tory government, filling the air instead with gloom and the promise that things would get worse before they got better. Let's not dwell on the one act of these past 12 months that cut through most to voters: the withdrawal of the winter fuel allowance from millions of pensioners. Let us instead judge Labour on its own terms: delivery. On that list of Starmer's, there's a decent range of items, from the three trade deals that had eluded the Conservatives – with the US, EU and India – to a fall in NHS waiting lists, down to their lowest level in two years; from the expansion of free school meals provision to increased wages. The trouble is, none of those achievements goes anywhere close to repairing the damage Labour itself says was done over the past decade and a half. Inside Downing Street, they still profess their shock at the state they found the country in. Whether it's overcrowded prisons or a dysfunctional water industry, so much is 'busted'. It is a herculean task to turn all that around, and especially to do it fast – all the more so when there is so little money to spend. Starmer might be calm about the fact that a great change hasn't happened within a year, but it requires a Panglossian optimism to believe it will come even within five, in time for the next election. In whichever direction you look, delivery is maddeningly hard. To take just one example, the government has won plaudits for its first moves on housing, including a target of an additional 1.5m homes in England by 2029. That means building 300,000 each year. But for the most recent 12-month period, the tally stood at just over 200,000. If everything goes right, Labour's planning reforms should eventually boost housebuilding by 25% – but that still won't be enough to reach its goal. Still, let's be like Starmer and hope his various plans work and the government really does deliver. The lesson of Biden is that even that won't be enough. In fairness, Labour's high command does get that point, acknowledging mere 'lines on a graph' or stats won't cut it. The improvement has to be felt in people's lives. And yet, that too may not be sufficient. Voters don't usually go in for gratitude; they are as likely to credit themselves as the government for a material advance in their circumstances. What's needed, and Team Starmer swear they understand this too, is a story, a narrative of where the country has been and where it could go next, that the public can follow. Land on the right one, and it gives you the time and space this government has been denied. Margaret Thatcher's self-proclaimed mission to wean Britain off a sclerotic state was compelling enough to make a virtue even of economic hardship: the bitterness of her medicine was deemed proof that it was working. With no equivalent story, every setback of Starmer's is taken in isolation, evidence that the government doesn't know what it's doing. The PM offers no persuasive explanation of what is happening or why it may take a while. That wrecks a party's relationship with the electorate, obviously, but also with its own MPs, as the increasingly restive and frustrated parliamentary Labour party attests. Most Labour folk admit this narrative weakness is their achilles heel, and that it stems from a deficiency in the leader himself. A lawyer, a technocrat, a manager: whatever word they use to describe the prime minister, no one ever accuses him of being a storyteller. The man who seems least worried by this narrative void is Starmer himself. The formative experience of his (short) political career was his early tenure as Labour leader, half a decade ago. Trailing far behind his then opponent, he read commentaries daily telling him that Boris Johnson was going to dominate British politics for the next 10 years and that his destiny was to replicate Neil Kinnock as a transitional figure, preparing the ground for someone else more capable of winning. Those prognosticators got him wrong then and, he believes, they have got him wrong now. Besides, in his mind, the narrative of his government is obvious. How could anyone look at all he has done so far and not see that the common thread is an earnest effort to improve the lives of ordinary working men and women? To him, it's so clear it scarcely needs to be spelled out. Unfortunately, as the last US president discovered, everything needs to be spelled out, a hundred times a day, on every conceivable platform and very loudly. The days of quiet, patient, unflashy achievement, eventually recognised by a grateful electorate, are long gone, if they ever existed. Starmer and those around him need to adapt to that reality soon. If he fails, there is a grinning master of the new politics, who revels in the primacy of talk over action, of grievance over solution, who is currently 10 points ahead – and waiting to pounce. Jonathan Freedland is a Guardian columnist
Wales Online
27 minutes ago
- Wales Online
'It's time we spoke about Swansea with the pride it deserves'
Our community members are treated to special offers, promotions and adverts from us and our partners. You can check out at any time. More info It's a year ago today that I had the honour of being elected Member of Parliament for Swansea West. As a newbie to politics, it was a big change. Twelve months on I wanted to share a few reflections on what being an MP has taught me so far. Before standing for office, I spent a decade as an economist campaigning to raise the living standards of low-to-middle-income households – to reduce poverty and raise wages. My job was examining spreadsheets, not making speeches. But those spreadsheets made for increasingly uncomfortable – in fact horrifying – reading. They charted rising costs and wages that failed to keep pace, rising homelessness and deepening poverty. The value of wages in Swansea weren't a penny higher on the eve of the 2024 general election than when the Conservatives took office back in 2010. That's why, when the election was called, I knew it was time to stop charting the problems and start trying to change them. That brings me to the first big lesson I've learned since being elected: we mustn't give up on the idea that progress can be made – because it can and it is being made. Yes the country has big problems, and it will take time to fix them after fourteen years of Conservative austerity. But concrete improvements have happened faster than many thought possible. Exploitative zero-hour contracts are being banned, wages for the lowest earners have been raised, and austerity has been ended. Making tough but fair choices on tax last Autumn is why we can invest £50 billion more a year into public services. There's a long way to go, but wages rose more under the first 10 months of Labour than in 10 years under the Tories. That's progress – and we've got to keep going. The second lesson: the power of co-operation. In Wales we know that politics is a team sport because under devolution, when co-operation breaks down, it's the public who pay the price. The Welsh Government did a heroic job of trying to cooperate with the previous UK administration, but were too often met with a brick wall. Now, with Labour in Westminster and Cardiff for the first time in more than a decade, we are starting to see what genuine partnership can achieve. We have set record budgets for the Welsh Government, and that is exactly why NHS waiting times are at last falling. There's a long road ahead, but we are moving in the right direction and we will fight tooth and nail against Reform's plans to privatise the NHS. Third: most people assume an MP's job is standing up in Parliament, but most of the work happens in Swansea. Over the past year, I've met more than 100 businesses, community groups and charities in Swansea, knocked on almost 3,000 doors with the local Labour Party, and answered more than 7,000 letters about policy issues – not least on assisted dying. As their MP, over 1,000 people have turned to me for help with problems over the past year and I'm glad we often have been able to help. Housing is the most common culprit in Swansea. The final thing I've learned is this: we need to stop talking Swansea down. Too often, we undersell our potential. But our ugly lovely town has a thriving cultural scene, world-class university, rich industrial and political history, and the potential to host cutting-edge renewable energy technology in the Celtic Sea. It's time we spoke about Swansea with the pride it deserves and see it matched with vision, investment and jobs. Trying to change the charts, not just draw them, is hard. Spreadsheets don't shout at you like people do! And that's exactly as it should be. Democracy means listening, learning, and being held to account. Every letter, every doorstep conversation, every community meeting is shaping my work as an MP. I'm proud of what we've started – but I know there's much more to do. So thank you, Swansea West, for putting your trust in me over this past year and the next four. I'll never take it for granted.
Western Telegraph
28 minutes ago
- Western Telegraph
What is a proscribed organisation?
On Thursday the House of Lords backed proscribing the group under the Terrorism Act 2000 without a vote. But what is proscription and what does it mean for an organisation to be proscribed? – What is a proscribed organisation? According to the Government website, under the Terrorism Act 2000, the Home Secretary may proscribe an organisation if they believe it is concerned in terrorism, and it is proportionate to do so. Yvette Cooper is Home Secretary (Stefan Rousseau/PA) Under the law this means the organisation commits or takes part in acts of terrorism, prepares for terrorism, promotes or encourages terrorism (including the unlawful glorification of terrorism), or is otherwise concerned in terrorism. Once an organisation is proscribed it is illegal to join or show support for it. – What does terrorism mean when talking about proscription? As defined in the Act, terrorism means the use or threat of action which involves serious violence against a person, involves serious damage to property, endangers a person's life (other than that of the person committing the act), creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or section of the public or is designed seriously to interfere with or seriously to disrupt an electronic system. The definition also sets out that the use or threat of such action must be designed to influence the government or an international governmental organisation or to intimidate the public or a section of the public. Additionally, it must be undertaken for the purpose of advancing a political, religious, racial or ideological cause. – What factors are taken into consideration when determining whether proscription is proportionate? According to the Government website, the Home Secretary will take into account the nature and scale of an organisation's activities, the specific threat that it poses to the country, and the specific threat that it poses to British nationals overseas. Protesters outside the Royal Courts of Justice amid a hearing over whether the proscribing of Palestine Action should be temporarily blocked (Lucy North/PA) The Home Secretary will also consider the extent of the organisation's presence in the UK, and the need to support other members of the international community in the global fight against terrorism. – Which other groups have been designated as proscribed organisations? There are currently 81 international terrorist groups proscribed under the Terrorism Act 2000 and 14 organisations in Northern Ireland proscribed under previous legislation. The most recent proscription orders concerned Hamas, the Wagner Group, Hizb ut Tahrir and Terrorgram. Other organisations on the list include Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (Isil), and various aliases, and al Qaida.
