Denmark is first in Europe to raise retirement age to 70
Denmark has raised its retirement age to 70 for everyone born after 1970, becoming the first European country to reach the symbolic threshold.
While other nations are bogged down in seemingly intractable political battles over increasing the state pension age, the Danes are following a long-established principle that it should go up broadly in line with life expectancy. The average for Danes is 81.7 years. The legislation was passed with an overwhelming majority in the Danish parliament.
However, there is a good deal of public unease at the plan to oblige many people to keep working until the end of their seventh decade. Some MPs look aghast at projections that the retirement age could rise as high as 77.
Even Mette Frederiksen, the Social Democratic
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
Irish fury over asylum crisis: How resentment is boiling over nationwide, with thousands attending latest anti-migrant protests following huge surge in refugees and country's pro-Palestine, anti-Israel stance
Thousands took to the streets of Cork over the weekend for two very different demonstrations - one a pro-Palestine march and the other described as a 'national protest for Ireland'. Some 3,000 people joined the latter, an anti-immigration rally organised by Ireland Says No - which attendees said signalled a feeling in the country that 'enough is enough'. Protesters, describing themselves as Irish patriots and nationalists, said they have two main grievances - 'mass migration' and a belief that they have been forgotten by the government. Footage of the march shows a sea of tricolour flags raised above the crowds, with chants including 'Ireland for the Irish' and 'Whose streets? Our streets!'. The rally's lead organiser, ultra-nationalist Dublin councillor Malachy Steenson, said that the size of the crowd would instill confidence in people who were concerned about airing their criticisms. 'We don't care what Brussels says,' he told the crowd, 'we are going to take this country and run it for the benefit of its people.' Speaking before local elections in November, he stated his view on how he felt this could be achieved: 'We need to close the borders and stop any more migrants coming in.' Recent figures show that Ireland is housing more than 33,000 applicants for what is known as 'international protection', up from 7,244 in 2017. According to official statistics, the number of Palestinians who applied in 2024 increased by more than 700 per cent from the previous year - when the conflict in Gaza erupted. The Irish government has been vocal in its support of the Palestinian people, officially recognising the Palestinian state last year and formally intervening in South Africa's International Court of Justice case alleging genocide by Israel in Gaza. Both decisions drew condemnation from Israel. The Irish government was asked whether its show of support would strengthen Palestinian asylum claims, but refused to comment. The protests in Cork passed peacefully on Saturday, with police dividing the two marches with a barrier and organisers of each encouraging marchers to behave responsibly. Speaker Derek Blighe, the former president of the Ireland First party who failed to get elected to the Dail in November, told crowds that young Irish people felt they had no choice but to leave the country. He accused the government of putting 'diversity and climate and foreigners first' and said that nationalists wanted to give the Irish diaspora 'a homeland to return to'. As many as 150,000 people moved to Ireland in 2023-24, Central Statistics Office (CSO) figures revealed, the highest number in 17 years. Around 30,000 of these were returning Irish citizens. In terms of asylum seekers, alongside arrivals from Africa and the Middle East, 100,000 refugees flocked to the country following Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Each costs the country nearly £70 a day, according to estimates - a figure that has increased by a third in two years. Last month, around a thousand people joined a march in County Donegal's Letterkenny, while several hundred organised a counter-protest. Local independent councillor Seamus Treanor said people living in his ward did not feel safe in their own homes due to heightened levels of anti-social behaviour. 'I want to get one thing straight - the reason we have a housing problem in this county is because our government opened our borders, and invited the whole third world to come in. 'They came in their tens of thousands, and communities like Carrickmacross are suffering the consequences.' At the end of last year the Irish Refugee Council revealed there were a record 3,001 asylum seekers homeless in Ireland. Pictures of encampments in Dublin and reports last year that a former paint factory was being turned into accommodation for 550 asylum seekers sparked fury among anti-immigration campaigners. Gardai clashed with hundreds of people at the former Crown Paints factory in Coolock last July. A number of fires were started at the site and dramatic photos showed a digger in flames. The police force charged 15 people in relation to the public order incidents at the north Dublin site. In November 2023, right wing figures including MMA star Conor McGregor ramped up fury over online misinformation and unsubstantiated rumours that a Algerian migrant had stabbed three children outside a kindergarten in Dublin. Riots exploded in the city, with a bus and tram torched and property destroyed as around 500 thugs rampaged across the city. Some of the rioters started a fire on the ground floor of a Holiday Inn Express following rumours that migrants were staying there. Others reportedly petrol-bombed a nearby refugee centre, with fire crews who responded being 'pelted with projectiles' and beaten with iron rods. Police officers were also attacked, with around 50 sustaining injuries, while one cab driver was punched and dragged from his taxi. To date, 85 people have been arrested in connection with the November 2023 riots, with 66 charged. While anti-immigration protests in Ireland have been peaceful in recent weeks, Dublin saw another wave of violence in February, again seemingly fuelled by anger over migration levels. Shocking videos showed Dublin descending into chaos - with knife fights on the streets and mass brawls erupting in residential roads. There were similar scenes of violence in Northern Ireland on Monday night. Anti-immigration riots erupted in Ballymena after two teenagers of Romanian descent appeared in court accused of attempting to rape a local girl. Social media footage showed homes in Co Antrim on fire after a masked mob lit curtains after windows and doors of terraced properties in the town were caved in. Four houses were destroyed after 2,500 people gathered in the Harryville area. Two more properties were also damaged and 15 police officers hospitalised. Police have said the violence is being investigated as racially-motivated hate attacks.
Telegraph
2 hours ago
- Telegraph
British citizens among 9,000 immigrants to be sent to Guantanamo
At least 9,000 undocumented immigrants, including British citizens, are to be sent to Guantanamo Bay detention camp, according to reports in the US. The first transfers are due to start within days, as the Trump administration ramps up its campaign to deport illegal immigrants. In January, Donald Trump announced plans to house 30,000 migrants in the notorious camp on Cuba, which was previously used as a military prison to house combatants captured during George W Bush's 'war on terror' following the September 11 attacks on the US. According to documents seen by Politico, the plan is to hold the migrants at the camp for a short period before deporting them back to their home country. Guantanamo currently holds roughly 500 people. This move represents a further toughening of the administration's immigration policy, which has seen masked snatch squads lifting suspected illegal immigrants off the streets. The official reason for detaining migrants at Guantanamo is to free up space in migrant detention centres in the US itself, especially with the White House setting a target of 3,000 arrests a day. However, critics say the administration believes using Guantanamo will serve as a deterrent for new illegal immigrants and encourage those already in the country to self-deport. An estimated 800 Europeans are on the list of potential Guantanamo detainees, with the Washington Post saying they include British and French citizens. It is a move which has reportedly alarmed European diplomats, given that they have previously co-operated in the repatriation of their own citizens. 'The message is to shock and horrify people, to upset people,' one State Department official told Politico. In Washington, a court is considering a plea to outlaw the use of Guantanamo to house migrants, with the American Civil Liberties Union claiming they are being held in dire conditions in a rodent-infested camp, where detainees are denied a weekly change of clothing and adequate food. In its writ, the ACLU accused the administration of using Guantanamo 'to frighten immigrants, deter future migration, induce self-deportation, and coerce people in detention to give up claims against removal and accept deportation elsewhere'. This was denied by the US Justice Department, which told the court that Guantanamo is being used as a temporary staging post. Previously, nine British citizens were held at Guantanamo, of which five were repatriated in March 2004. A further nine who had residency status in the UK, but not citizenship, were also held at the camp.
Sky News
2 hours ago
- Sky News
The spending review: Five things you need to know
Even for those of us who follow these kinds of things on a regular basis, the spending review is, frankly, a bit of a headache. This is one of the biggest moments in Britain's economic calendar - bigger, in some respects, than the annual budget. After all, these reviews, which set departmental spending totals for years to come, only happen every few years, while budgets come around every 12 months (or sometimes more often). Yet trying to get your head around the spending review - in particular this year's spending review - is a far more fraught exercise than with the budget. In large part that's because the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), the quasi-independent body that scrutinises the government's figures, is not playing a part this time around. There will be no OBR report to cast light, or doubt, on some of the claims from the government. Added to this, the data on government spending are famously abstruse. So perhaps the best place to start when approaching the review is to take a deep breath and a step back. With that in mind, here are five things you really need to know about the 2025 spending review. 1. It's not about all spending That might seem like a strange thing to say. Why would a spending review not concern itself with all government spending? But it turns out this review doesn't even cover the majority of government spending in the coming years. To see what I mean you need to remember that you can split total government spending (£1.4trn in this fiscal year) into two main categories. First there's what you might call non-discretionary spending. Spending on welfare, on pensions, on debt interest. This is spending the government can't really change very easily on a year-to-year basis. It's somewhat uncontrolled, but since civil servants wince at that idea, they have given it a name that suggests precisely the opposite: "annually managed expenditure" or AME. Then there's the spending the government has a little more control over: spending in its departments, from the Ministry of Defence to the NHS to the Home Office. This is known as "departmental spending". This is what the spending review is about - determining what departments spend. The key thing to note here is that these days departmental spending (actually, to confuse things yet further, the Treasury calls it Departmental Expenditure Limits or DEL) is quite a bit smaller than AME (the less controlled bit with benefits, pensions and debt interest costs). In short, this spending review is actually only about a fraction - about 41p in every pound - of government spending. You can break it down further, by the way. Because departmental spending can be split into day-to-day spending (Resource DEL) and investment (capital DEL). But let's stop with the acronyms and move on to the second thing you really need to know. 2. It's a "zero-based" review. Apparently The broad amount the government is planning to spend on its departments was set in stone some time ago. The real task at hand in this review is not to decide the overall departmental spend but something else: how that money is divided up between departments. Consider: in this fiscal year (2025/26) the government is due to spend just over £500bn of your money on day-to-day expenditure. Of that, by far the biggest chunk is going to the NHS (£202bn), followed by education (£94bn), defence (£39bn) and a host of other departments. That much we know. In the next fiscal year, we have a headline figure for how much day-to-day spending to expect across government. What we don't have is that breakdown. How much of the total will be health, education, defence and so on? That, in a sense, is the single biggest question the review will set out to answer. Now, in previous spending reviews the real debate wasn't over those grand departmental totals, but over something else: how much would they increase by in the following years? This time around we are told by Rachel Reeves et al that it's a slightly different philosophy. This time it's a "zero-based review". For anyone from the world of accountancy, this will immediately sound tremendously exciting. A zero-based review starts from the position that the department will have to justify not just an annual increase (or decrease), but every single pound it spends. It is not that far off what Elon Musk was attempting to implement with the DOGE movement in US government - a line-by-line check of spending. That's tremendously ambitious. And typically zero-based reviews tend to throw out some dramatic changes. All of which is to say, in theory, unless you believed government was run with incredibly ruthless efficiency, if this really were a zero-based review, you'd expect those departmental spending numbers to yo-yo dramatically in this review. They certainly shouldn't just be moving by small margins. Is that really what Whitehall will provide us with in this review? Almost certainly not. 3. It's the first multi-year review in ages What we will get, however, is a longer-range set of spending plans than government has been able to provide in a long time. I said at the start that these reviews are typically multi-year affairs, setting budgets many years in advance. However, the last multi-year review happened in the midst of COVID and you have to look back to 2015 for the previous multi year review. That certainty about future budgets matters for any government department attempting to map out its plans and, hopefully, improve public sector productivity in the coming years. So the fact that this review will set spending totals not just for next fiscal year but for the next three years is no small deal. Indeed, for investment spending (which is actually the thing the government will probably spend more time talking about), we get numbers for four successive years. And the chances are that is what the government will most want to talk about. 4. It's not "austerity" One of the big questions that periodically returns to haunt the government is that we are heading for a return to the austerity policies prosecuted by George Osborne after 2010. So it's worth addressing this one quickly. The spending totals implied by this spending review are nothing like those implemented by the coalition government between 2010 and 2015. You get a sense of this when you look at total public spending, not in cash or even inflation-adjusted terms (which is what the Treasury typically likes to show us), but at those figures as a percentage of GDP. Day-to-day spending dropped from 21.5% of GDP in 2009/10 to 15% of GDP in 2016/17. This was one of the sharpest falls in government spending on record. By contrast, the spending envelope for this review will see day-to-day spending increasing rather than decreasing in the coming years. The real question comes back to how that extra spending is divided between departments. Much money has already been promised for the NHS and for defence. That would seem, all else equal, to imply less money for everyone else. But overshadowing everything else is the fact that there's simply not an awful lot of money floating around. 5. It's not a big splurge either While the totals are indeed due to increase in the coming years, they are not due to increase by all that much. Indeed, compared with most multi-year spending reviews in the past, this one is surprisingly small. In each year covered by the 2000 and 2002 comprehensive spending reviews under Gordon Brown, for instance, capital investment grew by 16.3% and 10.6% respectively. This time around, it's due to increase by just 1.3%. Now, granted, that slightly understates it. Include 2025/26 (not part of this review but still a year of spending determined by this Labour government) and the annual average increase is 3.4%. Even so, the overall picture is not one of plenty, but one of moderation. While Rachel Reeves will wax lyrical about the government's growth plans, the numbers in the spending review will tell a somewhat different story. If you can get your head around them, that is.
