The UK government has confirmed that it does not plan to bring the pensions of Gurkha soldiers who retired before 1997 in line with those of the standard British Army, according to a response from the Ministry of Defence on 17th September 2024.
The question was raised by Conservative MP Andrew Bowie, who inquired whether there were any intentions to adjust the pension scheme for Gurkhas who retired prior to 1997.
Alistair Carns, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Defence and Minister for Veterans, responded by stating the government’s commitment to providing Gurkha veterans with a fair pension, stating, “The Government greatly values the service of all members of the Armed Forces, including the Gurkhas, who have a long and distinguished history of service to the UK, both here and overseas. The Government takes its responsibilities to our Gurkha veterans very seriously and is committed to providing Gurkha veterans with a fair pension.”
The pensions in question fall under the 1948 Gurkha Pension Scheme, which differs from the standard Armed Forces Pension Schemes. Carns explained that these differences are “objectively and reasonably justified” and have been upheld by three judicial reviews since 2003, including a case brought before the European Court of Human Rights.
The government maintains that the 1948 scheme continues to provide “a good income for our Gurkha veterans living in Nepal, in accordance with the original scheme design.”
Carns, who is relatively new to the issue, also noted that he looks forward to meeting with representatives from the Gurkha veterans’ community and the Ambassador of Nepal to discuss the matter further in the future.
The government’s stance on Gurkha pensions has been a contentious issue, with ongoing calls from veteran groups to bring their pensions in line with those of other British Army personnel, particularly for those who retired before 1997. However, the Ministry of Defence’s latest response indicates no imminent changes to the existing pension arrangements.
“The Government greatly values the service of.. .. the Gurkhas”
Just not that much.
Shame on us.
Plenty of money for the people in Dinghies 🚣
It’s shameful.
Meanwhile- 22% pay rise for junior doctors who aren’t put in harm’s way and were already better paid than people in most entry-level roles.
No they are getting a 4.5% top up on their 23/24 pay rise ( which was 8.5%) and they will be given the exact pay rise for 2024/25 as suggested by the independent pay review body which is 8.8%…as for why, we have a massive shortage of Drs and it’s all very well say don’t pay them, but are you the one happy to die because there was no dr to treat you ? As for entry role let’s be very very clear..a junior dr is not an entry role the entry role is medical student and that’s a job… Read more »
They should be on par with the rest of the army and have it backdated, it is another national disgrace and at a minimum discrimination.
Embarassing
Massive respect to the Gurkhas but giving them a pension equivalent to a British one would make them very very wealthy in Nepal. They deserve a pension with the same spending power as any British serviceperson no more, no less. Why are they a special case?
They shouldn’t be a special case, they do the same job as us, take the same risks as us, they should be paid like us. No argument.
Lots of them, I imagine almost all, retire here
Disgusting
Pathetic excuse from pathetic people.
If these people were prepared to die for this country they should be afforded the same level of care both during service and retirement.
I wonder what would happen, if another country were to form there own ‘Nepalese Rifles’ or whatever, offering better terms and conditions to the Gurkhas who serve the UK.
They also serve in the Indian army. No idea how their T&C compare, but I can guess.