WASPI Women Compensation Rejection by Labour Government

Despite the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO) finding that the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) was guilty of ‘maladminsration’ for failing to notify women early enough that state pension ages for women born in the 1950s would gradually be phased upwards from age 60 to 65 to equalise with men, Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall today told House of Commons that the Government is rejecting the idea of compensation.

Kendall argued that the majority of women knew that state pension age for women was increasing from 60 to 65 to be equal with men.  In fact, affected women were only notified some 28 months after the law came into force in 1995 and it was not made that clear.  Many women at the time would have been only in their early 40s, so may not have even taken much notice.  Kendall herself would only have been 24 at the time of the law change, so we guess it may not have been on her ‘radar’ either given that she had only just graduated in ‘History’ (nothing to do with demographics, politics, government or social policy) and then working in ‘child development and early years learning’, again nothing to do with the ageing population at all.

• The Pensions Act 1995 announced that women born from 6 April 1950 – 5 December 1953 would gradually have their state pension age increased to age 65  This was not directly communicated to those affected for another 28 months.
• This means that a women born on 6 April 1950 would not retire at age 60 but would retire at age 60ys and 1 month on 06/05/2010.
• It also means that a women born on 6 December 1953 would not retire at age 60 but would retire at age 65yrs on 06/12/2018.
• This gave women born in 1953 (who would have been aged around 45 years old at the time) very little time ‘to save in earnest’ to still be able to retire at age 60 (as planned) or career plan for working from 60 to 65.

We also fundamentally disagree with Kendall suggesting the majority women knew about the changes.  In fact, in our early years online, we did an online survey in 2002/03 of over 1,000 women with 9 out of 10 women unaware of state pension age increases.   This news was covered by Reuters, and a number of National news agencies and even appeared in the Sydney Morning Herald all those years ago, so please do not tell us that successive UK governments did not know that the majority of women did not know of the changes.

Comment

Women Against State Pension Inequality (WASPI) had already thought they had won after the PHSO findings and recommendations for compensation of between £1,000 and £2,950 each (total cost to government estimated at £10.5bn).  The Government has now rejected their recommendations and given that ombudsman services are unbiased arbitrators, not on the side of WASPI or Government and therefore, no bias in their findings or recommendations, we are amazed.  

It is interesting that Financial Advisers are legally bound to comply with Financial Ombudsman decisions and cannot appeal but His Majesty’s Government is not and you also cannot then ‘prosecute’ or ‘sue’ His Majesty or his representatives for its failings.

Quite honestly, we are staggered by the government’s decision to ignore the PHSO and we suggest the government is setting a very dangerous precedent here.  This was also not in Labour’s Election Manifesto, surprise, surprise.