Our party supports raising the retirement age from 60 to 65 because people are living longer, healthier lives and many are able to remain in work for longer. This change would reduce pressure on pensions, strengthen the economy and help ensure that retirement support remains affordable.
| Law | Previous | Proposed | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Retirement Age Policy |
Retirement at 60
|
Retirement at 65
|
Live tally across each chamber. Weighted by seats held.
For: 27 / 100 seats (27.0%)
Against: 41 · Abstained: 0 · Not voted: 32
| Party | Seats | Vote | Reason |
|---|---|---|---|
| Centrist Zone | 22 | Yes | With an ageing population, this proposal might make sense. We are fine with both a 60 and 65 year old retirement age |
| Democratic Group | 10 | No | When changing retirement age, we need to balance the welfare of dedicated workers with the economic responsibility of pensions, wages, etc. We feel that 60 strikes a good balance between these two concerns, so we won't support altering it. |
| Left Alliance | 20 | No | 60 is a good compromise |
| The Gaia Syndicate | 11 | No | age 60 balances workers rights and economy |
| Unionist Avalon Proposer | 5 | Yes | No reason given |
Every vote must state a public reason. Most recent first.
“age 60 balances workers rights and economy”
“When changing retirement age, we need to balance the welfare of dedicated workers with the economic responsibility of pensions, wages, etc. We feel that 60 strikes a good balance between these two concerns, so we won't support altering it.”
“60 is a good compromise”
“With an ageing population, this proposal might make sense. We are fine with both a 60 and 65 year old retirement age”