RUTH Wishart’s article (Principle on which we base the state pension is flawed, August 20) is itself seriously flawed.

Ruth says “the whole principle on which we base the state pension is flawed at base camp by utilising a statutory cut-off point. Life expectancy varies by more than 10 years just between different districts in Scotland’s major cities”.

Whilst true, this is but one of the of many factors that influence how many years (if any) an individual can expect as a pensioner. It would be impossible to adjust the pension of every individual to take account each person’s individual life expectancy. The basic principle is surely that if you pay into the pension through National Insurance contributions for the required time, you are entitled to draw your pension.

That, however, is the smaller flaw in Ruth’s article, which states that “the UK pension is worth just 29% of average earnings compared to 100% in the Netherlands and more than 93% in perennially cash-strapped Italy”. There is clearly a very significant discrepancy between this assertion and the article, on the same page, “What’s the state pension like in other countries across the world?” which states that “in the Netherlands … a single person gets an amount worth up to 70% of the net minimum wage, while a pensioner couple gets the equivalent of 100% of the net minimum wage (50% each)”. If the Dutch pension was indeed 100% of average earnings then clearly a very large number of people will be better off as pensioners than when working, which would seem both unlikely and unsustainable.

Read article here