World War Two Veteran Expresses Disappointment Following Meeting with Minister Over Frozen Pensions

A World War Two veteran reported feeling “angry” and “heartbroken” following a discussion with a government minister, which led her to conclude that the government is unlikely to review its current policy regarding the frozen state pensions of certain British citizens residing abroad. Anne Puckridge, who will reach the age of 100 this month, made the journey from her residence in Canada specifically to advocate for a policy change with the government. She represents one of more than 453,000 British pensioners living outside the UK whose state pensions do not receive an annual increase. Pensions Minister Emma Reynolds consented to the meeting after an initial request to meet Sir Keir Starmer was declined, citing “pressures on his diary.” After the discussion held in Parliament, Ms Puckridge stated that she felt “bitterly disappointed” and “disgusted.” She conveyed her impression that Ms Reynolds had been “polite enough and kind enough to come in and spend her time with us but I think her mind was made up before we even started the meeting.” Ms Puckridge indicated that she and other campaigners would need to consider “very carefully about what we really can do from now,” though she affirmed their intention to take further action. Ms Reynolds expressed gratitude to Ms Puckridge for the meeting and for recounting her experiences. A representative for the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) stated that the government acknowledges that “people move abroad for many reasons, and we provide clear information on how this can impact their finances in retirement – with the policy on the uprating of the UK state pension for recipients living overseas a longstanding one.” The spokesperson also mentioned that the government is “deeply proud of our veterans and their families for the contribution they make to our country.” Prior administrations have declined requests to increase frozen pensions, consistently pointing to the associated cost as an impediment. An informed source familiar with a former government’s stance indicated that restoring the value of these pensions would be more complex than it seems and could potentially lead to legal disputes. Ms Puckridge has been receiving £72.50 weekly since her relocation to Canada in 2001, at the age of 76, to reside closer to her daughter. Her state pension currently amounts to less than half of the £169.50 provided to pensioners who continue to reside in the UK. She informed the BBC that frozen pensions impact all facets of daily existence. She stated, “You’ve got to be careful about entertainment.” She added, “You’ve got to remember you can’t be as kind to your grandchildren as you’d like to be.” Furthermore, she expressed, “You feel you’ve lost all sense of dignity, the government has thrown you away, you know, out of sight out of mind.” Ms Puckridge recounted that upon notifying the DWP of her impending move to Canada, “they never said a word about [my] pension being frozen.” She continued, “The first I knew about it was when my first raise was due.” “I didn’t get it. So I wrote and asked about it, and I was told no… you will receive no more from the day you left the UK, no more increases in pension,” she explained. She further stated: “It’s the injustice of it that is so unfair, the fact that we were never warned.” Through a system known as the triple lock, the UK state pension increases annually by the highest of three measures: 2.5%, inflation, or earnings growth. Not every pensioner who relocates overseas experiences a freeze in their pension. The UK maintains agreements with various nations, including EU countries and the United States, which ensure that pensions continue to rise in parity with the amounts received by residents within the UK. However, countries such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and India are among those without such reciprocal agreements. Advocates for change argue that this disparity constitutes an injustice. Patrick Edwards, an Australian resident and member of the End Frozen Pensions campaign, stated that these pensioners contributed to the system like all others but are now being “treated differently merely because of their address.” He elaborated, “If they lived in many other countries around the world they’d be getting the same as people in the UK but unfairly they’ve been selected as having had their pensions frozen.” Furthermore, diplomatic efforts are also being exerted to alter this policy. It is understood that the Canadian government has already brought this matter to the attention of the current administration. The Australian government made multiple appeals to the previous government, and a spokesperson confirmed its intention to continue raising the issue at “appropriate opportunities.” There seems to be broad consensus that, from a political standpoint, it is challenging to rationalize the varied treatment of pensioners residing overseas depending on their country of residence. The Institute for Economic Affairs, a think tank that has frequently raised concerns about the long-term viability of the state pension, commented: “The government should always be trying to save money, but this does not look like a particularly principled way of doing so.” Nevertheless, past governments have contended that individual pensioners might not experience an overall benefit, given that many receive financial assistance from their resident governments, such as Canada and Australia, which could be diminished if UK pensions were unfrozen. They have also identified the expense of completely reinstating frozen pensions as a significant obstacle. In 2019, the Conservative government projected a cost of £600m to fully restore these pensions to the value they would have reached had they not been frozen. The End Frozen Pensions Campaign, however, states its request is solely for pensions to begin increasing from their present level. The campaign estimates this approach would incur a cost of £55m in the 2025/26 fiscal year.