PETITION UPDATE - 

Information is Power

Cathryn Louise Hall

Walsall

16 Sep 2014 — I have received a response to my freedom of information request regarding the number of spouses affected by the 1987 Police Pension Scheme - the data that the Home Office were able provide, relates only to the period 2008-2012.

The total number of 'cessations' (widows having had their pensions revoked due to remarriage or cohabiting with a partner) during that period were 131.

'The valuation data has details of around 22,000 spouse's pensions in payment within the Police Pensions Scheme 1987. Under current regulations, the pensions paid to each of these spouses would cease if they remarried or cohabited in the future............As part of the valuation as at 2012 our actuary estimated that ignoring cessation on remarriage for current and future widows would increase the schemes liabilities by around £50 million based upon recent rates of remarriage. This approximate calculation was based on assumptions for widows within the police pension scheme at 31 March 2012. It does not include the cost of reinstating pensions of widows who have already remarried and is based on actuarial assumptions about widows in pension schemes, not the national average life expectancy of a woman.' Home Office 

I found references to 'cost' and use of the phrase 'increase the schemes liabilities' misleading; widows in receipt of a pension under the 1987 scheme who do not remarry or cohabit, simply continue to receive a pension - when a widow has her pension revoked due to remarriage or because they move in with a partner, the scheme has surely 'saved' the cost of their pension entitlement for as long as they remain married or living with that partner. 

I would like to thank the people who have already contacted their MP regarding my petition, NARPO (National Association of Retired Police Officers) and COPS for their continued support. There are a number of influential organisations currently consulting with their membership; I hope that I will be able to add them to this list in my next update.

On October 29th 2014 I shall be lobbying parliament along with a small group of ladies from COPS, and the CEO of NARPO will be attending on the day.

The families of police officers who have lost their lives on duty may find it beneficial to contact COPS - Care of Police Survivors www.ukcops.org/
COPS is a UK registered charity. 

Having signed the petition you are amongst 63,490 individuals that agree that Theresa May should grant all police widows pensions for life - without you the campaign simply would not exist. 

Thank you.

Cathryn

 

 

Another Victory for RUC Widows

 

 

Cathryn Louise Hall

Walsall, United Kingdom

5 Dec 2014 — Federation welcome for 'righting a wrong' 

Release Date: 3 Dec 2014

Source: PFNI

The Chairman of the Police Federation for Northern Ireland, Terry Spence QPM, has welcomed the announcement that backdated pension payments will soon be made to RUC widows who remarried.

The Minister for Justice, David Ford MLA, said the legal position around eligibility had now been clarified and that he’d given approval for payments to be made. Payments will be backdated to 1 July 2014.  

All widows who remarried will be legally entitled to benefit under the relevant Section without the need for further legislation. The exception involves widows in the 1949 scheme whose husbands died or retired prior to April 1972.

Mr Spence said: “I’m glad this matter has been cleared up without recourse to further, time-consuming legislation. I welcome the Minister’s commitment to right a wrong and I know it will be well received within the police ‘family’.

“For many widows who lost their husbands, and then remarried, the decision to end their entitlement was an added and painful burden. This pension anomaly stood in the way of some widows getting re-married, and that was an intolerable situation.

“Removing a barrier such as this introduces decency and fairness into the system.”

The Policing Board/PSNI Pensions Branch will contact widows to confirm the necessary arrangements.

Congratulations ladies.

Cathryn

 

LATEST UPDATE:

 

5 Feb 2015 — Good afternoon all,

I thought that you would like to see the final paragraph of my latest letter from Mr Penning - Minister for Policing:

".....You mention in your letter the changes in respect of Armed Forces widow's pension. It is right that Ministers should be able to make changes when a compelling case is made. Given the case that has been put forward on behalf of widows and widowers of police officers, the Home Secretary has asked officials to look into the feasibility and affordability of any changes in this area, in conjunction with other departments. The full implications of any change will need to be taken into account before a decision is made, and any reform would need to be considered in the light of the Government's duty to ensure that public service pensions are affordable, sustainable and fair both for the members of those schemes and other taxpayers......."

I asked you to present a clear and compelling argument to the government with regards to the risks faced on a daily basis by serving officers, and the effect of their service upon their families; in agreeing to do so this is the stage that the campaign has reached as a result of your hard work.

The war is not yet won ladies and gentlemen, but I think that you should enjoy the credit for success in this particular battle - that is getting the government to consider making the changes that we have requested.

I am grateful as always for your support,

Cathryn

 

 

SUCCESS!!!

 

12 Feb 2015 — Good news folks,

MP Richard Graham has secured a debate about Police Widows' Pensions in parliament on Wednesday 25th of February 11-11.30 am.

If anyone can make it on the day it would be great to see you all - the more the merrier as we would like to make as much impact as possible.

If you are unable to make it on the day, there is still something that you can do - isn't there always! Could you please contact your MP and ask them to be there for the debate - provided of course that they intend to lend their support. 

Anyone that was promised the support of the Chief Constable of their force area do invite them - you never know they may fancy a day out in London with us.

If you do plan on coming, ask your MP if they can secure tickets for you in the public gallery.

Email me at CathrynHall@outlook.com letting me know that you will be there, and/or what response you have received from your MP.

Thanks as always for your support - let's make this a day to remember.

Cathryn

 

 

LATEST UPDATE

 

17 Feb 2015 — Hi folks,

Those bound for parliament on Wednesday the 25th February - we will be meeting at 9.45am at the Cromwell Green visitor entrance to Parliament. We need to go through the security checks at 10am to be through in time for our meeting with MP Richard Graham at 10.15 am. 

All campaigners that intend to come please complete the following as it will ensure that no-one is missed off my list, and I will know to look for you on the day.

I cannot list people's names here in the interests of confidentiality. I think that I have everyone, but I need to be certain.

Please email me at CathrynHall@outlook.com under the heading 'Confirm'.

Include your mobile number in your email.

Anyone willing to be interviewed by the media please let me know asap. PFEW will provide a Comms officer to brief you on the day.

Visit this website for maps and information:

http://www.parliament.uk/

I am so looking forward to spending the day with you all.

Cathryn

 

 

Yesterday in Westminster

 

Cathryn Louise Hall

Walsall, United Kingdom

26 Feb 2015 — 

 

If I had a pound for every time I have thanked someone during the course of this campaign I would have enough money to pay our lifelong pensions - today I am starting with an apology.

In the early hours of Wednesday morning I woke up with a headache of gigantic proportions, and it didn't respond to pain relief during our trip to London – as consequence we had to make an unscheduled stop at the services putting us behind schedule.

With 30 minutes to go before our meeting with Richard Graham MP, we were still half a mile out from Westminster and stuck in traffic, we had 30 minutes to reach the carpark gather our things together, get to the Houses of Parliament, pass through security and make our way to Westminster Hall. 

At this point I decided to contact everyone on my list of supporters to tell them to go straight to the meeting without me. As I was texting away frantically - a radio station phoned me to ask for an interview – I think I may have sounded a tad impolite as I explained that I didn’t have time. 

If in my confusion and haste I missed anyone and as a result they missed the day’s proceedings I am truly sorry. 

For me personally the day did improve as we arrived in time for the meeting and the pain killers finally kicked in. 

In the half an hour meeting prior to his Adjournment Debate - Mr Graham listened patiently whilst we reiterated that we stand together in our campaign for lifelong pensions for all widows and widowers. He listened to individual stories and made notes about the facts and figures available.

Brenda Neary had created an emblem for each of us to pin to our coats – a chequered ribbon and a red rose – Mr Graham graciously accepted his and wore it into the televised debate.

We were allowed into the room to hear the arguments put forward on our behalf – here is the TV link: 

http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Main/Player.aspx?meetingId=17270&st=11:00:30

I have chosen some of the key comments to include here to give an overview of what was said. Tribute was paid to you as campaign supporters:

Jeremy Lefroy (Stafford) (Con): ‘I am most grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Gloucester (Richard Graham) for securing this debate. Does the Minister accept that, in many cases, such as that of my constituent, Mrs Penn, who has taken the issue up with me at a surgery, people are supporting the campaign on behalf of others? The pension might not be hugely necessary for them financially, but they are supporting the campaign on behalf of their colleagues for whom it is. I very much commend the public-spirited nature of the petition. It is about not only those who need the pension—we fully respect their needs—but those who are doing it on behalf of others.’

Mike Penning: ‘I completely agree with my hon. Friend. The compassion that has been shown in the correspondence is remarkable. If people who are campaigning on other issues could look at how this campaign has been conducted, they might find that their campaigns receive not dissimilar support from across the House.’

Successive governments have refused to consider the changes we are asking for, as they would involve retrospective improvements to the schemes involved. Providing the ‘clear and compelling arguments’ in the personal accounts that you sent to your MPs and to the Minister - have led to the following developments:

Mike Penning: ‘My hon. Friend the Member for Gloucester mentioned that there was scepticism, to say the least, because no matter what colour of Government are in office, when people talk about “retrospective”, the Treasury has jitters galore. The important thing now, however, since we acknowledged that the case was compelling and the Home Secretary and I asked our officials to look into things, is that the Treasury as well as the Home Office is involved. Home Office and Treasury officials are working together, which is very important, because we must ensure that any decision we make is not only right, but one without a huge impact on other aspects that might lead, for example, to people claiming judicial review of other schemes.’

Listening to the terms of the changes that are being examined by the Home Office and the Treasury – was for me the most difficult part of the debate.

Mr Penning: ‘A full-time police officer in a force in England and Wales—I acknowledge the point made by the hon. Member for Bridgend and am as proud of being responsible for the police in Wales as I am for those in England, while those responsible in the other two devolved Administrations are also surely paying attention to the debate and the campaign—has a warrant in the service of the Queen and so is still responsible when off duty. Different terminologies can be used, but that is what I feel—police officers are still serving their community even when off duty. That puts pressures and responsibilities on them.

What does “an officer on duty” mean? Is an officer on duty only when they are on shift, or could it mean someone in a similar situation to Frank Mason, who was assisting the public when off duty? I am adamant that, if a scheme comes through and if we make the changes, there should be help in cases of the likes of Frank Mason’s—should his widow so wish.’ 

 

 

One Family

 

Cathryn Louise Hall

Walsall, United Kingdom

1 Mar 2015 — I have now had time to digest the events of Wednesday 25th during our visit to parliament. Many of you have been asking me about our next move.

We are in a promising but delicate position at present, with the Treasury and other departments examining some of the changes that we are requesting. This is the first time this retrospective change has ever been considered and that is down to you guys here on this petition - those of you reading this update right at this moment. 

During the adjournment debate the Minister for Police Mike Penning revealed that he had lobbied for the changes to the 1988 RUC Police Pension Scheme as he was then the Minister for Northern Ireland. In this he is an important ally.

The changes in N I have secured lifelong pensions for all RUC widows under the 1988 rules and widows that had previously had their pensions revoked due to remarriage or cohabiting with a partner will have them reinstated. 

‘Justice Minister David Ford has announced that he has given approval for the payment of pensions reinstated to RUC widows to commence.’
~ Wednesday, 3 December 2014

‘……..Initial legal advice indicated that only those widows covered by the 1988 pension scheme would be eligible. The Department was concerned to ensure clarity on this matter and sought further advice. It can now be confirmed that widows previously in the 1973 scheme are also entitled to the reinstatement of their pensions……..’
Northern Ireland Executive

Release Date: 3 Dec 2014
Source: PFNI
The Chairman of the Police Federation for Northern Ireland, Terry Spence QPM, said: “……I’m glad this matter has been cleared up without recourse to further, time-consuming legislation. I welcome the Minister’s commitment to right a wrong and I know it will be well received within the police ‘family’…..’

During Remembrance weekend in November of last year, Prime Minister David Cameron announced that Armed Forces widows and widowers would be able to retain their pensions after remarrying. However, campaigners had not requested the reinstatement of revoked pensions, therefore this was not considered nor granted.

Mr Cameron said of the changes:

'I think that it wasn't fair and I'm delighted that because we have a strong economy we can afford to make this change and give justice to these people.’

Daily Mail 8th November 2014

As you can see a lot of importance has been attached to the ‘justice’ and ‘fairness’ of granting to those widows and widowers the lifelong pensions that had been requested and campaigned for. Our campaign is asking for parity with the RUC widows.

During the debate on the 25th much was said about the definition of ‘an officer killed on duty’ this is an obvious indication that what is actually being considered by the Home Office and the Treasury is a change to the ’87 rules for the survivors of those officers killed on duty - to the exclusion of all others.

We believe that it is fair and just that all police survivors should benefit from pensions for life irrespective of whether: their spouse was killed or died on duty, was an off duty serving officer, or died of natural causes or post retirement. This is what we mean by ALL and what was meant in Northern Ireland. 

Terry Spence spoke of ‘the police family’ and I am asking members of our police family to contact Mr Penning and others to ask that we be treated fairly and with the same level of justice. Our mantra at the beginning of this campaign was ‘no widow left behind’ that sentiment is now extended to widowers that have joined with us in our campaign.

As delighted as I would be to hear that the survivors of officers killed on duty were to be granted lifelong pensions – I think it is wrong for some members of the police family to be treated differently to others.  

To emphasise our idea of what it means to be part of the police family please consider attaching photos to your emails – families are made up of individuals, of real people and we were able on Wednesday to remind the government that we and our children are a living memorial to our lost loved ones and not just numbers on a data base.

Those of you that do not have connections to the police can also send photos if you wish and declare yourself an ‘honorary member of the police family’ for the duration of this campaign.

Send your emails and photos if you choose to include them a.s.a.p. to your own MP and the following:

mike@penning4hemel.com
mayt@parliament.uk
richard.graham.mp@parliament.uk
steve.brine.mp@parliament.uk

If these email addresses do not work as a link type them in manually.

Mark all correspondence and emails as ‘Private and confidential’ and include the title Police Widows’ Pensions. The Budget will be announced on the 18th March so the race is on to make your feelings known. 

Jeremy Lefroy (Stafford) (Con) said this during the adjournment debate on the 25th:

‘I am most grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Gloucester (Richard Graham) for securing this debate. Does the Minister accept that, in many cases, such as that of my constituent, Mrs Penn, who has taken the issue up with me at a surgery, people are supporting the campaign on behalf of others? The pension might not be hugely necessary for them financially, but they are supporting the campaign on behalf of their colleagues for whom it is. I very much commend the public-spirited nature of the petition. It is about not only those who need the pension—we fully respect their needs—but those who are doing it on behalf of others.’

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201415/cmhansrd/cm150225/halltext/150225h0001.htm#15022587000001

I would like to join him in paying tribute to those of you that are campaigning on our behalf with little or nothing to be gained for yourselves - you are wonderful.

We have been complimented on the tone of our campaign and the way in which we have conducted ourselves in our communications with the government – we are members of the police family and grateful members of the public, we pride ourselves on our dignity – they should not be so surprised. 

I can be contacted at CathrynHall@outlook.com

Thank you a million times over for your continued support.

I am currently in discussion with a sympathetic MP with regard to how we can best respond to the gap that exists between what we are asking for and what the government appear to be considering – the key word here is ‘considering’. 

Mike Penning: ‘We are now at an important stage. We are analysing the implications in cost terms and any impact on other schemes that might be affected. For example, three months ago we did the right thing for the armed forces and now that case is being used for the police, so we have to be careful about whether what we do has implications for other schemes. The compelling case that has been put forward by colleagues today, as well as by others, and the nature, tone and empathy of the campaign, have been enormously helpful to me as a Minister and to the Home Secretary, enabling us to acknowledge the “compelling” case—the first time such language has been used.’

We have been praised for our dignified campaign and we need to maintain our high standards, keep our heads and respond in an appropriate fashion. All is still going to plan and as always I will have something in mind that supporters can do to move the campaign forward.  

This is the written record of the debate as it appears in Hansard:

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201415/cmhansrd/cm150225/halltext/150225h0001.htm#15022587000001

As you can see from the transcript – we have come a long way in a comparatively short space of time and you guys have made it happen. I will send a further update when I have a firm idea of what is required and how best to progress – for those of you still willing to accept that challenge - you will not have long to wait.

I did give the radio interview on BBC Radio 5 Live at 12.35 pm - I concluded by saying:

"It is a courageous government that makes changes that successive governments have been unable to make." 

Once the budget is announced - we may know just how brave our government is prepared to be.

Cathryn

 

 

Early Day Motion 828

Police Widows' Pensions

 

 

Cathryn Louise Hall

Walsall, United Kingdom

8 Mar 2015 — Hi folks,

Please ask your MP to support this Early Day Motion - but do not forget to stress that we are seeking justice for all police widows/widowers not just those whose spouses 'were lost in the line of duty'.

POLICE WIDOWS' PENSIONS
Session: 2014-15
Date tabled: 02.03.2015
Primary sponsor: Llwyd, Elfyn
Sponsors: McDonnell, John
Henderson, Gordon
Anderson, David
Hopkins, Kelvin
Barron, Kevin

'That this House recognises that police officers often place themselves in the way of harm to protect their communities, sometimes making the ultimate sacrifice and leaving behind families and loved ones; believes that we have a moral and public duty to ensure all police widows and widowers are financially provided for for their lifetime; is deeply concerned that the Police Pension Regulations 1987 do not allow police widows or widowers the opportunity to marry or cohabit, without losing their right to a police widows' or widowers' pension for life; agrees with the Police Federation of England and Wales that it is morally and ethically wrong to make police widows and widowers and their dependants effectively choose between future financial security and the possibility of future personal happiness; welcomes the fact that the Police Pension Regulations 2006 allow new entrants or serving officers to transfer to a new scheme which permits their survivors to access benefits which are payable for life regardless of whether they remarry; regrets that nevertheless many police widows and widowers still remain disadvantaged by the Police Pensions Regulations 1987, and calls on the Government urgently to review the Police Pensions Regulations 1987 to ensure that the families of those who have served their community and been lost in the line of duty receive financial security regardless of their decision to remarry or cohabit.'

We are receiving support 'from across the house' this is a good sign.

Cathryn

 

The link below will help you find out who your MP is just in case you do not know:

 

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/      or  http://www.parliament.uk/mps-lords-and-offices/mps/