A The recession is already upon us and could last through next year and beyond, according to the Bank of England. It’s a grim outlook, tempered only by the Bank’s Monetary Policy Committee signaling that the downturn is unlikely to be as severe as expected, despite its jolt to mortgage payers last week with a 0.75 point increase. percentage of base rate.

Interest rates will peak at a level lower than the 5.25% previously expected by financial markets – somewhere between 3% and 4% – which means that the recession, rather than being the longest in 100 years, will be short and shallow.

In a way, it is embarrassing that the UK economy could be pushed into a recession by low interest rates. But that’s what happens when your growth engine generates the same power – and has the same reliability – as an Austin Allegro.

The Bank’s weak outlook is in line with most industry surveys, which show the UK is not contracting as much, at least not in a way seen in previous recessions, as stagnating.

The labor market symbolizes malaise, appearing both unhealthy and hopelessly in bad shape. Most people who want a job and can do it have a job. It may not be the best job or the one they’ve always wanted, but they have one.

Tory MPs, under pressure to explain why 12 years of Tory policies have done nothing to improve the economic outlook, regularly repeat the unemployment rate, which is at its lowest level since the 1970s.

To counter the misleading message of this simple statistic, a report released later this week will show how unemployment is artificially depressed by the large number of people who are no longer looking for work, because they are sick or so tired that they have took early retirement.

The report is the launchpad for a new commission on the future of job aid, which will bring together “experts from business, public services and civil society to develop a blueprint for reform”.

Like many commissions, it could write its conclusions within a few weeks given what is known of the government’s failings and the measures needed to improve the situation. But he needs to show he’s considered all options, so it may be a few months before his findings see the light of day.

Interestingly, the initial report shows how the UK has experienced “one of the worst jobs recoveries in the world, fueled by a shrinking workforce and a lack of access to employment support. ‘effective employment’.

Sponsored by the Institute for Employment Studies (IES) and the charity arm of fund manager abrdn, the report says a finding from earlier this year still stands – that the UK is almost unique in the world for the number of employees below pre-pandemic levels. The recovery is the third worst in the developed world, behind Latvia and Switzerland.

As our government scrambles to find an answer, the report says Latvia and Switzerland are improving rapidly. “At the start of next year, the UK is likely to be the only country in the developed world with a lower employment rate than in 2019,” the report said.

The results are much broader and more detailed than can be discussed here, but with the Bank of England saying the main reason it needed to raise interest rates was a lack of workers, they are important to the debate over the economy.

Last week, it became clear that interest rates were not raised to combat the inflation generated by the high price of energy on world markets. The main reason is to create a recession that will put 500,000 people in the benefit queue and thus undermine those demanding higher wages.

Raising wages to offset higher inflation is the “second-round effect” that central bankers say needs to be stopped, otherwise businesses will have to raise prices, creating more inflation. Only a rise in unemployment can sap people’s appetite for a wage showdown.

Except, as IES chief Tony Wilson has spent much of the past year trying to persuade ministers they could increase the labor supply by bringing the 500,000 or no longer looking for work.

Endless Tory infighting means no changes have been made to the way Britain treats those who want to work but find they can’t or need a soft reintroduction after having Covid, or because they are over 50 and, like many millennials, have reconsidered handing over their time and mental well-being to a slave employer. Brexit, of course, made this bad situation worse.

The Sunak/Hunt budget will not provide an answer. Like the Bank of England, it will follow the miserable path we are all on – towards stagnation.

Right to a family in the event of the death of a State employee covered by the National Pension Scheme – Applicable rates of the death benefit

No. – 57/03/2022-P&PW(B)/8361 (1)
Government of India
Ministry of Personnel, Public Claims and Pensions
Pensions and Retirees Welfare Department
***

3rd Floor, Lok Nayak Bhavan, Khan Market,
New Delhi, dated October 28, 2022

BUREAU MEMORANDUM

Subject: Entitlement for the family in the event of the death of a civil servant of the central administration covered by the national pension system -reg.

The undersigned is hereby informed that the Department of Pensions and Retired Welfare has notified the Central Civil Service (Implementation of the National Pension Scheme) Rules, 2021 and the Central Civil Service (Payment of gratuities under the National Pension Scheme), 2021 which are applicable from the date of its publication in the Official Gazette, to govern service-related matters and for the granting of gratuities respectively to central government civilian employees covered by the national pension system.

2. Rule 20 of the Central Civil Service (NPS Implementation) Rules, 2021 provides for the entitlement of family members in the event of death of a Central Government covered by the National Pension Scheme. Pursuant to Rule 20, on the death of a Subscriber, who had exercised the Option or in the event of which the Default Option under Rule 10 of the CCS Rules (implementation of the NPS), 2021 is to benefit benefits under the Central Civil Service (Pension) Rules, 1972 or the Central Civil Service (Extraordinary Pension) Regulations, further action will be taken by the Head of Office for payment of benefits in accordance with the Civil Service Regulations central public (pension). However, if the death is attributable to the service of the State, an additional action will be taken by the Head of Office for the payment of the benefits in accordance with the Regulations of the Central Public Service (Extraordinary Retirement) subject to the satisfaction of all the conditions granting benefits under these rules.

3. If, on the death of the subscriber, benefits are payable to the family under the Central Civil Service (Extraordinary Pension) Regulations or the Central Civil Service (Pension) Regulations, the government contribution and corresponding returns in the accumulated pension capital of the subscriber will be transferred to the government account. The remainder of the accrued pension corpus will be paid in a lump sum to the person(s) in whose favor an appointment has been made under the Pension Funds Regulatory and Development Authority (Exits and Withdrawals in under the national pension system). If there is no such appointment or if the appointment made does not subsist, the amount of the remaining accrued pension capital will be paid to the legal heir(s).

4. In the event of the death of a subscriber who had exercised the option or in the event that the option defaults under Rule 10 of the CCS Rules (implementation of the NPS), 2021 is to receive the benefits of the national pension system, such benefits may be provided in accordance with the Pension Funds Development and Regulatory Authority (Leaving and Withdrawing under the National Pension System) Regulations 2015.

5. In the event of the death of State employees covered by the NPS during service, and in the event that the benefits of the pension corpus accumulated under the NPS have been used, the family member of the deceased state employee would also be entitled to a death grant in accordance with Rule 22 of the Central Civil Service (Payment of Gratuities under the NPS) Rules, 2021. The rates provided in the rules for death gratuities are the following :

The maximum amount of death gratuity payable under this rule shall in no case exceed twenty lakh rupees.

6. All Ministries/Departments are requested that the above provisions regarding the entitlements of central government employees covered by the National Pension Scheme be made known to government officials covered by the NPS and staff responsible for pension benefits. retirement within the ministry/department. and attached/subordinate offices thereunder, for strict enforcement.

(S. Chakrabarti)
Indian Government Undersecretary

To
All Ministries/Departments/Organizations,
(According to the standard list)

Click to view/download PDF

[https://documents.doptcirculars.nic.in/D3/D03ppw/NPS%20OM%20281022_1fdapg.PDF]

ATLANTA — This week, abortion providers and advocates in Georgia went on trial, seeking to block the state’s ban on abortion after about six weeks of pregnancy. For more than three months, the ban forced Georgians to leave the state for essential care even in emergency circumstances, continue pregnancies against their will, or self-administer abortions without medical support. During two days of testimony in Fulton County Superior Court, the court heard from experts about the harms of the six-week ban, and the plaintiffs argued for the court to permanently block the ban as quickly as possible.

The state legal challenge, Sister Song c. state of georgiawas filed in July, shortly after a federal appeals court lifted an injunction against the ban (HB 481), allowing it to take effect for the first time since it was signed into law in 2019. The lawsuit says no only that the Georgia Constitution contains strong protections for individual privacy and prohibits political interference in pregnancy decisions, but that the law was void under the federal Constitution when it was enacted in 2019. The lawsuit disputes also a provision of HB 481 that further violates the privacy rights of Georgians by giving prosecutors unfettered access to the private medical records of patients who have had abortions without due process.

Statement from Monica Simpson, Executive Director, SisterSong Women of Color Reproductive Justice Collective:

“This lawsuit is about our right to make decisions about our bodies, so the stakes couldn’t be higher. Georgia has one of the strictest abortion bans in the country, and as with all policies that suppress rights, deny access and police bodies, it is steeped in a white supremacist agenda designed to affect disproportionately communities of color. For months, people have been forced to carry their pregnancies to term or cross state lines to access medical care and risk criminalization. It is time to end this extreme and cruel political interference in our health care decisions, our bodily autonomy and our lives. The people of Georgia deserve reproductive justice.

Statement from Julia Kaye, staff attorney for the ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project:

“We are grateful to have had the opportunity to demonstrate in court the devastating harm that Governor Kemp’s six-week abortion ban causes every day, especially to black and brown Georgians. The state witnesses who testified today relied on junk science that has been repeatedly debunked. In fact, throughout the trial, the state doubled down on its political agenda to deprive women and others who need abortion care of their power to make the best medical decisions for themselves and their families. We look forward to the day when the court strikes down Governor Kemp’s cruel forced pregnancy law and the people of Georgia can once again access all essential reproductive health care.

Statement from Cory Isaacson, Legal Director of the ACLU of Georgia:

“We have heard from leading experts and obstetricians/gynecologists in Georgia who have pointed out the devastating consequences of the state abortion ban. The evidence showed how the abortion ban has put the health of pregnant women at risk and hampered the ability of Georgian doctors to provide their patients with the care they need and deserve. The situation on the ground is dire and things will only get worse if the ban is not lifted. »

Statement from Kwajelyn Jackson, Executive Director of the Feminist Women’s Health Center:

“It is heartbreaking that we have been forced to turn away so many of our patients who need essential abortion care. Many of the patients we’ve heard from over the past few months are past the six week mark and don’t know where to turn for care. Everyone deserves to have access to the full spectrum of reproductive health care in order to make the best decisions for themselves and their family. The court should block this cruel ban to protect Georgians from further harm. We will continue to support our patients and their right to access the critical care they need, when they need it.

Statement from Amy Kennedy, Vice President of External Affairs at Planned Parenthood Southeast:

“Even one day with this ban in place would have been too many – and for more than three months this abortion ban has deprived Georgians of their right to decide what is best for their bodies and their lives. Providers Abortion clinics are forced to turn away patients because politicians have interfered in their exam rooms And our patients are devastated to learn that we can’t help them here This court has the opportunity to do good for the people Georgians and to restore access to abortion, and we urge her to do so without delay. Pending that relief, Planned Parenthood Southeast and our sister affiliates remain committed to helping Georgians access abortion after six weeks. of out-of-state pregnancy, and our doors remain open for non-judgmental resources and support.

Statement from Alexis McGill Johnson, President and CEO, Planned Parenthood Federation of America:

“For more than three months now, Georgians have had to endure the consequences of this devastating abortion ban, living with fewer rights than Americans in other states. This unconstitutional ban on abortion has forced people beyond the early stages of pregnancy to find the resources to flee their state for treatment or to continue pregnancies against their will. Like all abortion restrictions, Georgia’s ban has disproportionately harmed communities that already face barriers to health care: Black, Indigenous, and people of color; low-income people; and those living in rural communities. We asked the court to end this state-inflicted trauma so that Georgian providers can care for patients in need. Planned Parenthood and our partners will continue the fight to restore the right to abortion in Georgia, no matter what.

Statement from Alice Wang, attorney at the Center for Reproductive Rights:

“This ban has inflicted devastating damage on pregnant Georgians for too long. Georgia is already one of the most dangerous states for pregnant women – its maternal mortality rate is among the worst in the country, and black Georgians are twice as likely to die of pregnancy-related causes as non-white Georgians. hispanics. Denying people abortion care will exacerbate this public health crisis. We urge the court to overturn this ban so that Georgians can make their own health decisions and are not forced to carry a pregnancy to term against their will.

During the trial, medical experts – including plaintiff and abortion provider Dr. Carrie Cwiak, public health expert Dr. Whitney Rice, reproductive psychiatry expert Dr. Samantha Meltzer-Brody , ultrasound technician Gloria Nesmith and maternal-fetal medicine expert Dr. Martina Badell — testified that the abortion ban has had and will continue to have devastating consequences for the health of Georgians. The ban forces Georgians seeking an abortion after the first weeks of pregnancy to travel hundreds or even thousands of miles for treatment, and only if they can muster the resources to do so. Georgians and others seeking care in states where it is still legal face long wait times for appointments. Those who cannot overcome the enormous financial and logistical hurdles to obtain abortion care in other states are forced to carry their pregnancies to term and give birth against their will.

Evidence shows that being denied an abortion can have lasting health and financial consequences for individuals and their families, including increased health risks during and after pregnancy; education, career and life plans that have gone off the rails; and four times the likelihood of living below the Federal Poverty Line (FPL). For some, the consequences of the ban can be deadly. Black Georgians face barriers to accessing reproductive healthcare due to structural racism within the healthcare system. As a result, black women in Georgia experience maternal mortality and pregnancy complications at a rate more than twice that of non-Hispanic white women.

This case was filed by the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Georgia, the Center for Reproductive Rights, the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, and Georgia-based law firms Caplan Cobb and Bondurant Mixson & Elmore on behalf of SisterSong Women of Color Reproductive Justice. Collective, Feminist Women’s Health Center, Planned Parenthood Southeast, Inc., Atlanta Comprehensive Wellness Clinic, Atlanta Women’s Medical Center, FemHealth USA d/b/a carafem, Summit Medical Associates, PC, Carrie Cwiak, MD, MPH, Lisa Haddad, MD , MS, MPH, Eva Lathrop, MD, MPH and Medical Students for Choice.

According to her, the current exchange rate weighed heavily on producers who rely heavily on imported materials in the production and packaging of sachets and bottled water in the country.

Chairman of NASPAWAP, Mr. Magnus Nunoo in a statement copied to Ghanaian time said that if the government did not rise to the challenge, producers would have no choice but to pass on the skyrocketing cost of production to the public.

“If the government does not answer the call within a week from today, we will have no choice but to pass the cost on to the public and the eventual shutdown of production and distribution for a week across the country,” he warned.

The statement noted that from plastic pallets used in the manufacture of polyethylene films to PET bottles for packaging, fuel for water distribution to market centers and consumers to electricity costs, among others administrative costs, water producers were the losers.

“Clearly, the last price announced in September is not even enough to break even the packaged water industry. As a result, the industry is accumulating debt in its operations at levels that are more viable,” he noted.

NASPAWAP recommended the government to take urgent action to reduce taxes on packaging materials for industry, review the import and customs duty formula for imported raw materials for water industry and freeze the payment of VAT, excise tax and other taxes on the packaged water industry.

He further called for government charges and fees for the packaged water industry to be frozen and, if possible, for utilities as well as taxes on reusable jar bottles used for dispensers to be completely removed.

“We call on the Bank of Ghana to exercise caution in adjusting the policy rate which increases banks’ cost of borrowing for businesses,” the statement said.

NASPAWAP has urged the public, civil society organizations and other key stakeholders to support the packaged water industry’s calls to keep it afloat.

Around the world, the economy has contracted in recent months.

Global GDP fell by 2.7% between April and June 2022, and the United States particularly felt the effects. Hawaii is no exception – the Department of Business, Economic Development and Tourism recently downgraded the state’s economic growth forecast to 1.7% for 2023.

But while today’s rising prices, political instability and sluggish economy are a concern, the uncertainty of what’s to come can be even more worrisome.

Let’s look at possible ways the government can help individuals and businesses cope.

Reform taxes

Although much of the responsibility for reducing inflation rests with the federal government, there are still ways for states to act. One of the main tools available to state governments is lower taxes, which can reduce the impact of uncertainty by giving individuals and businesses a greater cushion.

Although Hawaii is the state with the second highest personal income tax rate in the United States, the Hawaii Budget and Policy Center noted that most tax reforms so far have focused on lowering taxes for big business and the wealthiest groups.

However, income tax cuts are not the only option. The state government may also change tax brackets or rules regarding deductions and exemptions. The Democratic candidate for the next gubernatorial election, Josh Green, has considered scrapping the state excise tax on food and drugs.

Instead, it offers a fee to tourists to pass on the higher costs. It is hoped that Japanese visitors will return, which could make this solution viable.

Still, all of this is far from a magic ticket. By encouraging more spending, tax cuts may carry the risk of worsening inflation, which only increases long-term uncertainty.

Reduced regulations

From those in the construction industry suffering from rising raw material costs to tourism businesses unsure if anyone can afford to travel to their resorts, the cost of living is hitting hardest. businesses.

If companies don’t know how much they will have to pay for their fixed overhead in the next year, how can they plan for the future and take the risk to hire employees or expand? Although there are grants available, more could be done.

Hawaii has already started creating a regulatory sandbox for crypto companies.

A common area to consider is reducing trade regulations where possible. While this doesn’t entirely remove uncertainty, it does mean businesses have fewer costs to manage. Another area to pay attention to may be Hawaii’s zoning regulations, which are notoriously strict and often blamed for increasing the cost of housing.

A unique solution that has emerged over the past couple of years is regulatory sandboxes, which lower the usual barriers to entry for new businesses. Some states have experimented with them, and Hawaii has already started creating a regulatory sandbox for crypto companies.

It might be worth considering a similar measure for other industries to encourage innovation, which could also support job growth. For example, Utah has introduced an industry-wide regulatory sandbox, which allows new companies in any industry to test their idea (as long as it is deemed not to pose health, safety or welfare issues).

Tennessee is also considering a broad regulatory sandbox – could Hawaii take a similar route?

Of course, the state must help existing businesses, not just new entrepreneurs.