Explanation of how Government false assurances of pension protection and unfair rules of wind up have left Mr. Eaglestone – now 65 years old and suffering from cancer – without any pension after 34 years work and contributions in his asafe’ scheme.
Note comparing the Government’s treatment of the 32,000 Maxwell pensioners in 1992, with the treatment of the 100,000 or so pensioners from winding up schemes between 1997 and 2006. Their plight is far worse than the problems caused by Mr. Maxwell’s plundering of his scheme’s assets.
Ros critiques Pension Reform Minister, James Purnell’s interview on Radio 4’s aToday’ programme, where the Minister tries to reassure listeners that the Government is dealing with the wind-up situation.
Article published in Money Marketing magazine, on 2nd August 2006, highlighting the various pressures on Government to comply with the Parliamentary Ombudsman report and also the European Court ruling, calling for full compensation for those who have lost their pensions.Â
Brief question and answer crib to explain why Government is responsible for the injustices suffered by members of winding up pension schemes, as highlighted by the PASC and Parliamentary Ombudsman reports.
Ros critiques the fallacies in John Hutton’s reply to her Open Letter in the Telegraph. She explains the flaws in Mr. Hutton’s arguments and shows how the Government needs to rethink its stance.
Response to John Hutton’s attempts to justify his rejection of the Parliamentary Ombudsman’s report, explaining why the Secretary of State’s case does not hang together.
Open letter to Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, John Hutton, pointing out the errors in his evidence to the Public Administration Select Committee and criticising the Government’s heartless and shameful treatment of the victims of pension scheme wind-ups.
Ros suggests various ways in which the Government could organise compensation for those who have suffered losses as a result of scheme wind-ups – the Government does not have to fund it all from taxpayers’ money.
Document submitted to High Court outlining the case for Judicial Review of the Government’s unprecedented rejection of both the findings and recommendations of the Parliamentary Ombudsman’s report.