Bristish Pensioners are continuing to fight injustice around the indexation of expatriot pensions, this has led them to the European Court of Human Rights to present their case. On Wednesday September 2nd, 10 of the 13 original applicants to our case attended the ECHR Grand Chamber of 17 judges in Strasbourg. This was to hear the case that these 13 applicants had eventually brought against the UK Government, complaining that their pensions were not indexed, which constituted a breach of some of the articles in the 1998 UK’s Human Rights Act. The 4 applicants from Australia were there, Mr. Lothar Markiewicz, Mrs Rosemary Godfrey, Mrs Christine Shrubsole and Mrs Penelope Hill as was Annette Carson who most of us know was the original applicant from South Africa to fight this legal issue in the London High Court in 2002. Canada sent 5 of the 8 who originally made an application.
The oral presentation on our behalf was given by our barrister Mr. Tim Otty QC. The response from the UK Government barrister was given by James Eadie. Also attending the Court were John Markham, our Canada based lobbyist, Peter Kennan, the Canadian Alliance of British Pensioners’ Chairman, Peter Morris from British Australian Pensioners Association, myself and a few of the wives who had come, at their own expense, to support their applicant husbands .
The hearing was conducted before 17 judges from various countries in Europe including France, Germany, Latvia, Finland, Greece, the UK, Denmark, Spain, Croatia, Andorra and Monaco. The full hearing was filmed and this is available from http://www.echr.coe.int on the ECHR website. To see and hear this video you will need to have sound on your computer.
The link in full is also available from our own BPiA website www.bpia.org.au, as is Mr. Tim Otty QC’s complete oral presentation, in our favour of course. We unfortunately do not have the presentation from the UK Government, however it has been generously said, by several people who were there or have since seen the Court’s video that Tim Otty’s presentation was clearer, superior and more convincing than the defence presented by the UK’s counsel.
Mr Tim Otty’s argument was based on the British Government’s alleged violation of some articles in the UK’s Human Rights Act, in particular Article 14 re discrimination and Article 8 about the right to free unfettered movement of people across international borders. However the UK’s defence was mainly based on affordability and cost and the fact there were no reciprocal agreements between the UK and the “frozen pension” countries like Canada, Australia and South Africa. Also the UK defence insisted that we knew our pensions would not be indexed before we made the journey abroad or before we made contributions from abroad to improve our entitlement and that Government literature was available to discover this.
From Tim Otty’s advice we are hoping at least for a Court’s “declaration” that the UK is in breach of these Articles 14 and 8 and if so the UK Government will be expected, by the Council of Europe, to advise it in a reasonable time frame what action will be taken and when to remedy the breach. That is if we win.
There is a slight possibility the Court may rule on actions to be taken by the UK Government and how any remedy to which they might agree, should be implemented. Should any of our members ask about the hearing’s outcome then advise them that we do not expect a result from the hearing for several months. This lapse could be 9-12 months in duration but we do hope for a result, which is more likely to be advised in approximately 6 months’ time.
The International Consortium of British Pensioners [ICBP], UK activities.
With the Strasbourg hearing over and the major party political conferences due to commence soon, Labour’s in Brighton, the Tories in Manchester and the Lib Dems in Bournemouth, the International Consortium is organising a presence at each of the major party conferences. The purpose is to take this opportunity to promote our primary cause and hopefully educate potential new MPs as to the reasons for the International Consortium of British Pensioners, and the cause for which we are fighting.
We believe that in the event of a win for us in the ECHR there will still be much work required to help persuade or even force the British Government to change its approach to pension indexing for all UK pensioners abroad. We refer in this regards to the words from an ECHR video in which it is clearly explained that, should the Court find in our favour and compliance with this outcome is not forthcoming from the defendant UK Government, then diplomatic pressure, which can include political sanctions, will most likely be imposed.
The Committee of Ministers will not sign off on the case until satisfied that the defendant party is remedying the violation of which it is found guilty, thus marking the UK Government as being in breach of the European Convention on Human Rights. Any signatory refusing to honour the Convention is not made welcome at the table of the Council of Europe. Respect of the Council’s judgment is a crucial element of the Council of Europe’s system for the protection of Human Rights, the Rule of Law, democracy and hence the democratic stability of European unification. We are advised by Tim Otty that the UK government is generally agreeable to act on ECHR judgments which may go against it.
BPiA activities in Australia;
In the last monthly report we mentioned the proposed changes to the Centrelink “taper rate”. The Government currently takes 40 cents from each $1 received from the UK pension but proposes to take 50 cents as from September 20th this year. We will continue to argue our case for a revision, to retain the old 40 cent ruling. However although things do not look too good in this regard, we are advised, the changes will not apply to existing Australian Centrelink age pension holders, although it does seem that eventually they may do so, and it is the “may” we need to investigate and understand as we continue our campaign to retain the old regulations.
We note too that with a recent change in the UK pension regulations there are new opportunities for some members who may have just or will soon be reaching pension age, to pay voluntary contributions, Class 3, for up to a maximum of 6 additional non qualifying years going right back to 1975-6 years through to 1995-6. However the price to pay for each year is £626.60. This offer may seem less attractive than the earlier VCs but it could be of interest to some members. We do have some details of this opportunity. We believe it only applies if one has already achieved 20 years contributions history and applies from 6th April 2009 and only if you have reached pension age between 6th April 2008 and 5th April 2015
Jim Tilley [jimtilley@bigpond.com ]
Hon Chairman,
Woronora Heights NSW