Why have you not kept your promises to end the confiscation of overseas bought govt pensions?
From: Robert Newcombe
Dear Winston Peters,
I am one of 100,000 elderly who lose any overseas social insurance govt pension paid for out of earnings because of the old Section 70 now the new Section 187-191 a subject both you and the Prime Minister know very well and have done so for years without really ever pursuing it.
After many complaints to the Human Rights Commission over the loss of these overseas earnings, the MSD/Treasury reviewed the legislation Section 70, Social Security Act that means tests these incomes against our entirely different entitlement, NZ Superannuation.
For the benefit of our readers here is the link:
The conclusions unfair and discriminatory and all recommendations were ignored, after all Parlament is supreme over the Bill of Rights.
In 2005 whilst you were in coalition with Helen Clark's Labour, NZ1st forced another review via the MSD of Section 70:
This review, same conclusions as the one previous but added "inequitable, outdated and out of step with other country's social security systems and again all conclusions and recommendations ignored.
The repeal of Section 70 was in the NZ1st manifesto 2014 as it was in Labour's and you have constantly courted the votes of the elderly especially we Section 70 victims yet in the coalition agreement you sent in a letter out to us victims via www.nzpensionprotest.com claiming that in the negotiations you could not get the subject "over the line".
Well despite your unwillingness to raise the subject in Parliament, 2 out of the three injustices of Section 70 will end in July.
The Spousal agreement, where if a spouse has an overseas contributory govt pension greater than their Super, the MSD not only denies all their Super but reduces the excess off the partner's Super, even by Section 70's normal insanity it was cruel, but thankfully that comes to an end in July.
The second relief, we hope, in July, is for those of us who have voluntary overseas govt pensions, social insurance contributory based into a govt scheme because the contributions could be opted out into the employer's scheme.
The nonsense of this is that my UK voluntary 2nd level social insurance pension will be allowed to be kept, hopefully, but the problem is the UK 2nd level pension scheme after mine is compulsary so that means out of the 63,000 UK State pensioners impoverished by Section 70, the nonsensical rule of allowing voluntary but not compulsary pensions of the same nature shows that who ever thought up this up has not to really thought it through, but probably in reality the loss of this easy cash took precedence.
Still 2 out of 3 has to be congratulated but the 3rd part, the one just mentioned affecting over 100,000 elderly and that denies us the right to keep compulsary social insurance govt pensions are now covered by Objective 22 of the UN Global Compact for Migrants and which New Zealand signed up to in December 2018.
OBJECTIVE 22 states:
"Establish mechanisms for the portability of social security entitlements and earned benefits 38. We commit to assist migrant workers at all skills levels to have access to social protection in countries of destination and profit from the portability of applicable social security entitlements and earned benefits in their countries of origin or when they decide to take up work in another country".
Notice the We commit, NZ signed up to this and is included in We.
Whilst I read you are not a fan of this Compact which I can understand for other reasons, you as a Foreign Secretary dealing with other countries via agreements must surely recognise that although the GCM is not legally binding it is morally binding and in 2022 NZ will be reviewed, read judged on their implementation of the 23 objectives and if 22 has been ignored it will no doubt be unacceptable.
And all the time Chinese immigrants arriving here aged 55 need never work, could be on a benefit and at age 65 receive NZ Super at the same rate as NZ born AND get to keep their Chinese State pensions, social insurance based like 63,000 UK state pensions and another 36,000 pensions from around the world PLUS they get contributions from the state which was the original intention of Section 70 and has always been ignored in their favour.
This positive discrimination in favour of Chinese pensioners is a shocking indictment on the New Zealand govt of its discriminatory treatment of us New Zealand citizens.
So I ask you as Deputy PM and leader of NZ1st, of which I am a member and on behalf of all elderly affected to get this last bit "over the line".
For those readers who are affected, you can add a comment below called an annotation to make your feelings known about NZ's shameful treatment of us elderly.
Here's Grant Robertson, http://www.migrants-to-nz-beware.info/Au...
He goes first talking about this unfairness at a Labour leadership contest in Nelson 2014, then David Cunnlife and Shane Jones last.
Not one of them has ever shown any willingness to tackle this ill treatment of so many elderly.
Here's Jacinda Ardern in 2015 speaking at the rewrite of the Social Security Act and demonstrably shows her feelings about Section 70 and after all her promises to end the injustice, carried on the age old tradition of impoverishing the weakest Ssection of society in the rewrite of the Act.
How it works, the NZ pension RIP off: https://youtu.be/zo9YjX4KR1c
Jan in her 70s still having to work: https://youtu.be/ndfaz8KC7_w
Or how about Siegfied: https://youtu.be/Ml8JZ0NqVbk
Bob's not too happy either: https://youtu.be/P7BhtTW_aZk
Peter gets his feelings known: https://youtu.be/ff7fI9huI6o
And finally Chris, https://youtu.be/HpvhsFUJCM4
Just one of the 15 of us who took the National govt to the UN Human Rights Council in 2014 where Crown Law's lie about the govt's own reviews and evidence being described as "unsupporting information" signed off by Anne Tolley, defeated us.
In anticipation of a full explanation as to whether you still believe in reform and if so why has nothing been done?
From: W Peters (MIN)
On behalf of Rt Hon Winston Peters, thank you for your email.
While the Deputy Prime Minister considers all correspondence to be
important and all messages are carefully read and considered, it is not
possible to provide a personal response to every email which is received.
Where the Deputy Prime Minister has portfolio responsibility for the
issues that you have raised, your correspondence will be considered and
responded to where appropriate.
Thank you for taking the time to write.
(Please note that this acknowledgement is an automatically generated
Office of Rt Hon Winston Peters