WASPI Compensation

AGAA4

Exactly Wyllow where can they find that amount of money to compensate Waspi women? I have sympathy for those who didn't know about the change but the taxpayer can't bear another burden such as this.

I’m in total agreement
I’d be happy to pay more tax to help rebuild public services. Not paying the waspi women isn’t something the country can afford
I’ve just cancelled something I can no longer afford. I expect if the government had a magic money tree or spare cash the WFA and the waspi claims woukd be paid. There isnt enough spare cash

Exactly Wyllow where can they find that amount of money to compensate Waspi women? I have sympathy for those who didn't know about the change but the taxpayer can't bear another burden such as this.

rafichagran

I am a waspi woman, I am disappointed, but my annoyance is the labour party especially Angela Rayner who stated people in that cohort should be compensated and then sat like a nodding dog, the ones in cars back in the day, when Starmer said no compensation as it would be the tax payers who suffered.
I find their lies when electioneering indefensible. I am glad I did not vote Labour, and in my heart of hearts knew this would happen, but was hoping I was wrong.

Policies change. I truly believe (and this is reflected in a number of LP MP's who still say we should pay out) that they would if they could, but where is 10.5 billion to be found?

Neither party promised Waspi compensation either speeches or in manifestos before the election despite quite a lot of talk on pensions (ie keep triple lock or not) *

it was not promised or pledged at all.

Perhaps they assumed because the Ombudsman report came out on March 21st it was a done deal? But the refusal of Sunak to follow up on it was the real giveaway - prevaricate.

If either party, when the election came up, were determined to award Waspi's compensation, you can be sure it would have been loudly announced and heralded.

I am a waspi woman, I am disappointed, but my annoyance is the labour party especially Angela Rayner who stated people in that cohort should be compensated and then sat like a nodding dog, the ones in cars back in the day, when Starmer said no compensation as it would be the tax payers who suffered.
I find their lies when electioneering indefensible. I am glad I did not vote Labour, and in my heart of hearts knew this would happen, but was hoping I was wrong.

So true, Casdon, Willow!

The problem some of my friends (who aren’t in very good financial straits) have is that they voted Labour last time (1 Plaid Cymru, 1 Liberal and 1 Green) on the basis of those MPs pledging support for WASPI!

They feel twice cheated, once on the money and again on the backtracking and two have also lost the WFA to boot!

It doesn’t help for me to say “I told you so” but they acknowledge I warned them of the old saying “Talk is cheap”

Casdon

This is getting repetitive, but to be clear, the Tories weren’t going to pay it either.
www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-conservatives-refuse-compensation-waspi-b2517772.html
Let’s just damn all politicians to hell and be done with it.

The Tories were never going to pay it! It's being used as another bashing excuse.

Agreed, Maggiemaybe.

We are a relatively peaceful society, but that depends on an understanding that the system is benign and works for us rather than against us. I think we disturb that understanding at our peril.

This is getting repetitive, but to be clear, the Tories weren’t going to pay it either.
www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-conservatives-refuse-compensation-waspi-b2517772.html
Let’s just damn all politicians to hell and be done with it.

Starmer, Kendall and Reynolds are effectively undermining the ombudsman process rendering it pointless.

They are. As is every person disputing and dismissing the results of this long and painstaking process because they personally had been told about the changes years in advance.

I think many people will come to regret the loss of an independent Ombudsman service whose recommendations are actually accepted and acted on.

The Ombudsman report came out on March 21st 2024.

Sunaks response on the 22nd March was

"Prime Minister “Rishi Sunak said his government would give a “considered” response to a report saying Waspi women deserved compensation, without promising when any response could be expected.” (Guardian report from parliament).

Nothing was then done. At the time of local elections Sunak said on 15th May
“However, following the ombudsman’s five-year investigation, it is imperative that we take the time to thoroughly review the comprehensive findings that have been published." He added: "An update to the House will be provided once the report’s findings have been fully considered.”

On 22nd of May Sunak calls for a GE. Despite all the talk on conservatives and Pensions he does not mention Waspi women.

*I would suggest that ALL governments have pushed this further and further back on the burner because of the costs and the complexity.

ALL governments have effectively undermining the ombudsman process rendering it pointless.

BTW, At PMQ yesterday Badenoch *didnt say the money should be paid, rather, she took Starmer to task for having promised it in 2019*

Totally AGREE FlitterMouse 😳🤬

Reading the Hansard from Tuesday 17 December it is very clear that Kendall has distorted the information given in the PHSO report.

hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2024-12-17/debates/26789BEE-3FC6-49B9-8E3F-EC53EE47F2E6/details

She claims that research from 2006 showed that 90% of women aged 45 to 54 were aware that the state pension age was increasing.

Compare the PHSO report:

106. In 2006 DWP carried out the first of three ‘Attitudes to Pensions Surveys’. The survey found that 83% of respondents were aware women’s State Pension age was going to rise in future. This included 90% of women aged 45 to 54 (women born in the 1950s would have been aged 47 to 56 in 2006). The survey did not ask respondents about their own State Pension age, so we do not know if respondents knew whether and/or how the changes affected them.

107. An internal DWP memo from November 2006 refers to a survey that year that found 50% of women whose State Pension age was between 60 and 65 thought it was 60. The memo proposes:

‘a direct mail to this group (supplemented by a range of related planned activity) was the most appropriate way of minimising the risk of future criticism that the Department has not been sufficiently proactive in communicating to those women affected by this change [in State Pension age].

....

115. Unpublished DWP research from 2007 found 85% of women aged 48 to 59 knew State Pension age was going to be equalised, but many women did not know when it would happen. The research also found that 50% of women whose State Pension age had risen to between 60 and 65, and 36% of women whose State Pension age had risen to 65, still thought that it was 60. DWP told us that if people are aware of the changes, they can find out their own State Pension age.

116. An internal DWP memo from April 2007 described the 2007 research findings as ‘depressing reading’. The memo reflects on the lack of progress since 2004 and the prospect of future complaints from women. It states:

‘You floated the idea of contacting the Ombudsman to get a feel for how she would react to claims from women saying they had never been told or were not aware that state pension age is increasing. In the light of the lack of upward movement from our 43% base figure from 3 years ago, we suggest putting this off until we can explain our strategy from here to get the message over. If we go now, we face being painted into a corner. Despite a really strong defensive brief, we still have 50% “ignorance levels” with three years to go. [The Ombudsman’s] first question will be what are you proposing to do about it?’

117. A ministerial submission from December 2007 shows DWP knew people did not understand the impact of the changes for them. It says: ‘One of the key issues is that whilst some women do in fact have an awareness of the impending change, they do not understand how this relates specifically to them’.

This was the DWP under a Labour government admitting that up to 50% of 3.5 million women were unaware of how the changes would affect them.

As I have explained elsewhere, there are tens of billions of excess funds in the National Insurance Fund - some 60 billion more than needs to be held as a contingency, coffers which will be swelled even more now by the rise in employers NIC - enough to fund universal WFP and pay WASPI compensation.

The burden on the taxpayer argument doesn't work. We are all taxpayers. Even for those with income lower than the income tax threshold they still pay all the other taxes that are levied. Many of us paid up to 50 years into the NIF only 35 of which are needed for a full State Pension. The money is there.

Interesting to read what Citizens Advice Bureau says about the ombudsman process.

A public sector ombudsman can't force an organisation to go along with their recommendations, but organisations almost always do.

www.citizensadvice.org.uk/consumer/get-more-help/how-to-use-an-ombudsman-in-england/

Starmer, Kendall and Reynolds are effectively undermining the ombudsman process rendering it pointless.

theworriedwell

Who was advising women about the married woman's stamp? I think it's pretty obvious that if you opt to pay less you get less.

No, it was set out what benefits would be included, which excluded by our AHA HR Department.

Pension - yes, would be paid, do not worry about that
Lower rate of sickness pay but don't worry, you would get six months' sick pay from HA.
No maternity pay.

twiglet77

I cannot articulate how much contempt I have for this Labour government, a cabinet full of loathsome liars.

In their 2019 campaign, knowing there was no chance of Jeremy Corbyn becoming PM, they promised unicorns and rainbows with a pot of gold they knew they’d never deliver.

Their bleating about a £22bn black hole is reserved for when they try to justify their spiteful treatment of their country’s vulnerable, funny it wasn’t a problem when they wanted to appease the public sector unions, accommodate immigrants in hotels, or cosy up to foreign governments, there are limitless funds when they want to find them.

If we as families let our elderly suffer while splurging funds elsewhere we would be rightly vilified. Labour has never got the priorities right.

👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏

mae13

Reeves and Starmer obstinately claim that 90% of women knew all about the pension changes. Oh, so they knocked on the doors of every household in the land to ask women personally?
Or have they just relied on advisers telling them what they want to hear?

(By the way Sir Keir, how much is it costing for you to go junketing here, there and everywhere in that jet? Or is that paid for by a cosy rich party donor?)

The jet is an entirely separate issue. Why must people keep on conflating things that have zero connection with one another?

I agree about the figures as to who knew being conflicting and unlikely, though. It seems that everyone is making them up to suit their own argument. A panelist on Jeremy Vine (Reem Abraham) says that 25% of pensioners are millionaires, and is not being challenged on that. She believes that it is wrong to ask young people (ie working taxpayers) to subsidise pensioners, and again, is not being challenged on the fact that compensation would not be a subsidy, but a legal remedy.

KS says that 90% of women knew about the changes, as this would absolve him of the need to compensate women, and Angela Madden (chair of WASPI) says that this claim is cherry picking figures, and that 90% of women had a vague idea that the pension age would rise at some point in the future for some people.

Sky News reports that the Ombudsman found that 60% of women had no idea about the changes.

I would love to see an objective and unbiased study, with a peer reviewed methodology and details of how the sampling was done, and a discussion based on the results of that.

Yes the raising of the retirement age was awful especially for women like my friend who just missed the deadline by a couple of weeks. I remember trying to comfort her a little by saying that I thought her pension would be at a higher rate when she got it. Well she got it eventually and it seems that it is at a higher rate than mine. Would that be some kind of compensation? Regarding Starmer well the thought of billions of pounds coming out of the economy at the present time is a sobering thought.

If the results had come out under the previous government, would Sunak have found and given 10.5 billion pounds to settle the claim?

They delayed and delayed just like with the post office claims.

Reeves and Starmer obstinately claim that 90% of women knew all about the pension changes. Oh, so they knocked on the doors of every household in the land to ask women personally?
Or have they just relied on advisers telling them what they want to hear?

(By the way Sir Keir, how much is it costing for you to go junketing here, there and everywhere in that jet? Or is that paid for by a cosy rich party donor?)

The issue is confuse by the two claims for compensation.

The first is for the so called "missing" pension payments for the years over 60 when no state benefit was available. This is not missing. It us being paid in the same way anyone deferring payment of a pension is paid - in higher pension payments when you do receive them.

The second is for those who claim they didn't receive notice. I have no idea how that could be proved. As it is the longer we keep the triple lock the more this sum (whatever it is) is recovered. We cannot keep it forever but this government does seem more prepared to do so for longer, than the last ones were.

Gawd this Labour government are committed blunder after blunder. Makes you wonder if they ever think of the unintended consequences of their decisions. They've now alienated pensioners, businesses and even hospices and care providers.

Disgusted but not surprised.

There’s no wow about Diane Abbott at all though, she’s a Corbynite, and it was during his leadership that Labour had said compensation should be paid. I’d be amazed if she had said anything else?

Wow! Even Labour’s Diane Abbott has come out and said compensation should be paid to these women.

I cannot articulate how much contempt I have for this Labour government, a cabinet full of loathsome liars.

In their 2019 campaign, knowing there was no chance of Jeremy Corbyn becoming PM, they promised unicorns and rainbows with a pot of gold they knew they’d never deliver.

Their bleating about a £22bn black hole is reserved for when they try to justify their spiteful treatment of their country’s vulnerable, funny it wasn’t a problem when they wanted to appease the public sector unions, accommodate immigrants in hotels, or cosy up to foreign governments, there are limitless funds when they want to find them.

If we as families let our elderly suffer while splurging funds elsewhere we would be rightly vilified. Labour has never got the priorities right.