NEWSLETTERS

Volume 1 : Issue 4

A 2004 AUCKLAND HIGH COURT RULING CONCERNING OVERSEAS PENSION DEDUCTIONS ALTHOUGH HIDDEN FOR MANY YEARS NOW HAS SERIOUS IMPLICATIONS FOR THE CROWN

In 2004, an Auckland High Court ruling, stated simply that pension schemes, although contributory under the law of the overseas country, if they did not have a Government funding component they were excluded under the rules of the Social Security Act 1964 - Section 70. In short MSD could not take them!

MSD ignored this of course and continued the practice right up until this very day! In the test case concerned, MSD had attempted to deduct the pension of an immigrant under the Section 70 direct deduction scheme.

The Court ruled in the immigrants favour on the basis that the pension was an employee/employer pension and not Government-funded. The latter being the key words and for the first time in a New Zealand Court of Law, the MSD Chief Executive was found to be wrong in his determination of overseas pensions subject to direct deduction.

When the decision went against the Chief Executive, undermining his hitherto unquestioned authority, the Ministry marshalled all its forces to appeal the decision.

What business did the Ministry have in going to the High Court to appeal a case involving a single minor pension?

The Court records for the immigrant’s case, and subsequent appeal, reveal that the Chief Executive took particular exception to the wording in the ruling that the pension was ‘not government-funded’. From the records, it appears that the Chief Executive was not asking, but insisting that the Judge change the wording.

The Court dismissed his appeal.

Why the Chief Executive of MSD so concerned over the wording that the immigrant’s pension was ‘not government-funded’, and why was he so anxious for the Judge to change the wording? The answer is very simple. For decades, under the direction and authority of the Chief Executive, WINZ/MSD has been appropriating billions of dollars in overseas pensions from immigrant elderly people of New Zealand and those New Zealanders who have also worked overseas who took advantage of employer/employee funded pension schemes.

The majority of those pensions have NOT been Government-funded as is especially the case of pensions earned in the UK. The UK pension scheme, although compulsory, is most certainly not funded by the UK Government even though the UK Government may be obligated to lend to it if additional funds are required, as is stated in the judgement.

The NZ Seniors Party is going to aggressively pursue the result of this test case because it implies that many seniors are affected and should be recompensed accordingly. We need more members to support our mission.

Please ask your friends and family to join. Go to www.nzseniorsparty.org.nz and join today.