Keir Starmer is right: Waspi women pension claim is "ridiculous" - Rachel Cunliffe | New Statesman

[@angusswanson5984]

Problem is - I didn’t hear Starmer, Rayner, Kendall et al say that the waspi campaign was ‘ridiculous’ when they stood with the campaigners.

[@tomk8729]

Labour hypocrisy? You'll be arguing the pope is a Catholic next.

[@californiadreamin8423]

The problem Angus is that you don’t wear the kilt in your home !!

[@gibbonsdp]

No party in government can ever deliver all the things it wanted to do in opposition. Especially when the public purse strings are so tight.

[@ellie.l6585]

Yes, exactly. They just prove yet again what a bunch of disingenuous frauds they are. Willing to say anything to curry favour. Totally vile, the lot of them.

[@skyblazeeterno]

Excuse making​@@gibbonsdp

[@andrewchallis7186]

At last a common sense appraisal of this campaign. Labours problem is of their own making by toadying up to the campaign for purely electoral reasons, both in 2019 (offering them a £59 billion bung) and 2024 with any number of photo opportunities.

[@leebex100]

When they raised the men's retirement age, did we demand £10bn in compensation?

[@vincelicata5880]

Good point , and starmer is right, I’m sick of all these pay outs ..

[@HariSingh96K]

@@vincelicata5880if Starmer is right , why did he say he was going to compensate them when he wasn’t in government ?

[@johnfitchie9892]

As our life expectancy is less, we don't draw as much pension on average, surely we should be compensated for that a nice lump sum at 67 ? 😊

[@bob1234881]

​@HariSingh96K he didn't... Corbin did but he's in even in the party now.

[@HariSingh96K]

@ yes but Kier took photos with them and protested alongside them…

[@williamjohnson5229]

The waspi women should cancel netflix, buy less coffee and stop going on holidays. Ive been told by women of this exact demographic that that is the magic solution to finacial problmes.

[@glostergloster6945]

Dont forget avocadoes, they need to stop eating avocadoes

[@ravindra7791]

​@glostergloster6945 😂 , well made ...funny thing is given the incremental increase in the pensions the numbers might just add up

[@sallybrant3042]

Proper laughed at this 😂

[@bg1616]

Don't group them up as one entity. There are individuals within with own character and outlooks

[@williamjohnson5229]

@bg1616 and their own character is entitlement and ignorance. If you retire without bothering tk check when you get your pension, that is entirely on you. Ignorance of the law is not a defence. We don't get a personalised letter everything a new act of parliament creates new laws. How you can avoid learning your pension age is changing, when you have 20 years notice is beyond me. These women are just lazy and entitled boomers.

[@gracie8458]

I am 72 and would have been included in this payment if it had gone ahead but I'm far more concerned about my working children in their forties trying to make ends meet. They simply can't afford to bankroll this payment.

[@petertodd-fh5sb]

They can if they stop sending it abroad

[@rolandrowland6992]

as a 24 year old male I knew about this is 2005 when I wasn't managing a pension. Its unfathomable that the recipients would not be aware that their pensions were changing bearing in mind it was announced even ten years prior to that. And in any event they haven't lost any money.

[@TheSupersomerset]

So why did Labour go along with them? Perception is everything and Labour are increasingly being viewed as dishonest and incompetent (kickbacks, winter fuel payments and now WASPI duplicity).

[@rolandrowland6992]

@@TheSupersomerset ill judged political posturing.. Winter fuel payment is fine. They should have removed it from everyone. We shouldn't be subsidising a broken market we should be fixing it

[@stephenjudge7531]

Of course they lost money - tens of thousands in lost pensions for some. If someone decided to halve your salary would you still say you’ve not ‘lost’ any money ?

[@rolandrowland6992]

@stephenjudge7531 they didn’t lose a single penny. The date is correct there was no loss. Personal mismanagement and/naivety is the only thing that’s happened. And as a taxpayer I don’t think it’s right to pay for that.

[@rolandrowland6992]

@ I was 24 in 2005. And even at that age was aware of pensions equalisation. You couldn’t be bothered to keep up or wilfully ignored three announcements and chose not to get an SPA forecast. That’s on you. Not me

[@Jim90117]

No offense but in an age of equality, women shouldn't be complaining about missing out on pension payments when men were forced to retire years and years later. How is that fair?

[@ellie.l6585]

What you're forgetting though, Jim is that during this period women were paid less for doing the same job as men and were not allowed to join private pension schemes purely on the basis of gender. Receiving five years of state pension at least went some way to redressing this imbalance at that time.

[@margaretpeasegood9791]

What equality is this Jim? In the seventies I was denied an interview for a job and told, 'We don't take women' Remember many of these women lived through many unequal times.

[@glostergloster6945]

@@ellie.l6585 'and were not allowed to join private pension schemes purely on the basis of gender' Sorry but this is nonsense. My mother (who has now passed away), was born in 1944, she entered the workforce in the 1960s, she had a private pension that she contributed to from the start of her career to the end of her career.

[@ellie.l6585]

@@glostergloster6945 I'm very pleased for your mother but that clearly wasn't the experience of everyone during those years. Many ladies have been interviewed about this issue and have described this experience. I'm sure you're not suggesting that they're being untruthful. Plus, read Margaret's comment above. Because your mother was thankfully treated fairly and equally isn't a reason to doubt the experience of others.

[@Armed-Forever]

@@ellie.l6585women got paid less because they did less work, anyone who’s worked in any job knows this, especially in warehouses

[@colinthompson3111]

I would like to thank Rachel Cunliffe for doing this video. I didn't realize the perspective she presented here from other UK media. I hope she gets a media award for her professionalism. 😊

[@bbuzz1687]

It's about women being accountable - it's not a popular view. State pensions are akin to a ponzi scheme, ths isn't new.

[@TheZaxanator]

Please make the entire podcast episode on why the Waspi campaign is ridiculous, I would enjoy it very much.

[@bg1616]

Why?

[@degaulle30]

This whole thatcherite boomer thing of 'ive paid my taxes, I demand a personalised financial response from the government at the expense of everyone else', honestly its mainly annoying cause someone far younger than them has to repeatedly explain what NI and taxes actually are to someone who we're told is wise and experienced.

[@PMMagro]

Women live longer than men. To start paying women pensions 5 years earlier than men is bananas. It is like getting a pension for life at 65 when you live to 85-90 instead of 75 and expect the same level of pensions and/or pension fund payments duriing your work life. The basic maths does not add up. The only way it could work is if women gets lower pensions than men based on the same income. Given that women earn less than men to start with that whould be a low pension for sure...

[@tulyar57]

The State pension (in its current form) was introduced in 1948, a very different age. The universal pension was geared to married couples who got £2 2s and single people (largely men) on £1 6s per week. At the time, married women were ineligible and in fact it was common and legal practice to refuse to hire married women and sack those that married later as they were expected to have children. There was no equal pay. The whole point of the pension was not a 'comfortable retirement' but to lift people out of absolute poverty. If men died before statutory retirement age (which was more common than not) it was to ensure women who would have had little or no independent income did not starve. And people wish for 'the good old days'.

[@ctid107]

​​​@@tulyar57However work was mostly manual and life expectancy was shorter. Men received their pensions 5 years later and then most of them died earlier than women. That's the greater injustice by far, I wonder what the compensation bill for that would be if men pressed a claim?

[@tulyar57]

@@ctid107 The point I am making is that it was never designed to be 'equal'. Men were expected to work and women, stay at home and raise families. Single women earned much less. It only started to change with the Equal Pay Act in 1970 and that meant women's pension age would eventually rise to meet men's not the other way round. State pensions were a relative pittance anyway but, sadly, was most elderly people's only income.

[@ctid107]

​​@@tulyar57If it was never designed to be equal, then why is the institutionalised sexist treatment of men not the bigger issue?

[@lightweightben]

Life expectancy for men is 4 years shorter. To be ‘equal’ men should be able to get pension from 64 and women 68 - giving both 15 years retirement on average.

[@fatbikemontage2931]

The reason the official parliamentary report recommended compensation is because the DWP failed to notify affected people when the retirement age for them changed. They relied on those people being informed by the media, or having the necessary hindsight to check that it hadn’t changed.

[@audreywinterbottom5988]

Totally agree and I am one of the women affected.

[@Paul-eb4jp]

Well said Audrey, I've lost my winter fuel allowance and I agree with the decision.

[@milo2324]

When EU nationals had to register before 30th of June 2021, the Gov only sent letter 30 days before. If your passport was not valid, you could not use the website or the app but had to ask for paper form. But they refused to send it, unless they were given proof from embassy that it would not be possible to get new ID before thr deadline. They already had people's email, phone number, why it must be only letter? What's about sending text message where you would need to reply back to confirm you read it. And email as well. Nothing changed since Windrush and they wanted many as many people as possible to missed the deadline.

[@JillOsgerby]

It wasn’t just about when women realised this was happening. There was little time for some to earn enough to make up the difference especially when many women worked part time because of other responsibilities. More women did not work outside the home in this generation. Also women had much lower wages than men historically which affected women more in this age group. Older women are an easy target in my opinion.

[@benjaminwilliams3168]

Labour definitely on the right side on this issue. It is totally unjust to demand younger workers (anyone under 50 really) to pay waspi women for a pension they're never going to get themselves. Im in my late 30s and I'd be incredibly surprised if the retirement age was less than 70 by the time I get there. So why should I pay compensation to people who are upset aboit not getting to retire at 60? They're still getting a minimum of 4 more years than my cohort will get.

[@sholness85]

Yes. I completely agree. People born in the 1950s have had a far easier ride than every decade since.

[@Glass_Eye]

Maybe they should have told them that instead of posing for pictures with them?

[@benjaminwilliams3168]

@@Glass_Eye that's a fair point.

[@petertodd-fh5sb]

They were stringing them along labour would do anything to get power they lied there way into power.need to stop using our money abroad

[@crissummer4058]

The government can withdraw the state pension at any time if it is deemed it can't afford it. It always was a benefit.

[@jennyd255]

I'm just within the affected age group, and even I think that the whole thing is rather ridiculous. Some of my peers really do need to wind their necks in and stop expecting everyone else to pick up the pieces if they haven't bothered to properly inform themselves! The thing that annoys me even more is the way that all this is sadly adding to a negative perception of the government. With Mad Boy Musk starting to sub the UK far right we really need more upset like a hole in the head.

[@vicattard1528]

Rachel cunliffe right on the mark. Utterly brilliant.

[@DD-tn1um]

Isn’t the issue not whether compensation is merited but rather the hypocrisy of saying one thing/ lying while out of govt. and the reneging when in Govt?

[@rp1692]

Well they didn't. Most of the quotes date back to before the 2019 election. A few may be later. But there was no commitment in the 2024 manifesto, and when the ombudsman published her report ahead of the election, Labour avoided endorsing it. And that lack of commitment was reported at the time.

[@AH-te5gs]

Why not watch the clip before commenting? That's also what they're talking about.

[@californiadreamin8423]

Well DD, the definitions of hypocrisy, lying and fiscal prudence, have changed in the last 14 years, and if you’re in any doubt I refer you to the utterances of Boris Johnson, who for example engaged the services of one of the countries foremost legal experts (and expensive ) to defend himself for lying to parliament…..and then ran away , like Cameron, to write his memoirs. I’ll stick with Rachel Cunliffe’s explanation…..in fact it’s worth a second listen !!

[@DD-tn1um]

@@rp1692 “avoided endorsing” doesnt cut it. It doesnt matter what you or I think. The British people arent stupid and dont like liars. Ask Nick Clegg.

[@rp1692]

@@DD-tn1um I don't see much similarity. Nick Clegg didn't avoid giving an opinion on tuition fees. He gave very specific promises, including in the 2010 manifesto, which he then broke.

[@owatopham]

My Mother, born in 1950, knew back in the 90s that she would have to work longer than those born before 1950. So I feel no sympathy.

[@irenecoulson3079]

Then Labour shouldn't have made promises and campaigned heavily for WASPI compensations. To me, this is about trust and truth and as Govt have handed foreign lands Billions and Billions one can understand why WASPI ladies feel betrayed

[@owatopham]

@irenecoulson3079 Agreed the Labour luminaries should not have aligned themselves with the WASPI women. But I constantly feel betrayed by governments and their decisions but I don't ask for compensation. It's a mite self entitled to be honest.

[@algernonwolfwhistle6351]

@@irenecoulson3079 The promises were made in the manifesto of a Corbyn led Labour Party and we all remember what happened at that election. The last manifesto made no mention of it.

[@susancollins3015]

The women born in 1950 got their pension only 1 or 2 years. later - those born after 1955 were affected the most as those pensions were put back by 6 years.

[@owatopham]

@@susancollins3015 But did you know of the changes and if not why not? This issue is not about any injustice it is about whether people were suitably informed.

[@georgewood00]

Have to completely agree with the young lady on this podcast makes very cogent points

[@samsicles_jr]

rachel nails every point in this whole video 👏

[@PaulDenison-r7r]

How is it that the tax payer can't afford to put right a flawed system but can afford to pay the fines for the water companies, their dividends, directors bonuses, Starmer's constant flight costs, MP's second home heating bills to the tune of several thousand plus other assorted perks for the politicians, etc etc etc and that is before the promises that Labour made to the Waspi women and then reneged on as soon as they got into power.

[@matthewleitch1]

The main retirement age change was announced 15 years earlier, but subsequent accelerations of the announced schedule were made with much less warning.

[@shinkansenshinkansend8316]

Whether their grievance is legitimate or not isn't the issue here. This is about Starmer's credibility and whether he's trustworthy. He's demonstrated that he'll say anything to gain power. This, the winter fuel payment and the farmers' land grab are going to be Labour's Poll Tax. They've upset so many people, they aren't coming back from the hole they've dug themselves into.

[@realhorrorshow8547]

The legitimacy of the grievance is absolutely the issue. Starmer's credibility - given the general contempt for politicians, to which the Tories have contributed massively - is trivial. One would cost the taxpayer billions, the other is a Daily Mail headline. There is no "farmer's land grab", merely the re-introduction of Inheritance Tax for farmers, and at half the rate other wealthy people - if they fail to manage their assets cleverly - have to pay. A married couple, who own a farm, can claim up to £5 million in exemptions, and then their heirs pay 20% on the rest. Do you have over £5 million in assets? I haven't and neither have most people. If this leads to those, like Clarkson, who look at farmland as a tax dodge, selling up, all the better. Maybe the inflated price of land will fall and new and younger farmers will have a chance.

[@shinkansenshinkansend8316]

@@realhorrorshow8547 It's normal for people to hold different views on issues. Some applaud hard work and building a legacy to hand down, others are bitter and envious. Choose your team I guess? Starmer, Reeves, Cooper and Rayner used those Waspi women as political props and indicated that they would support their cause. Whilst I agree that Conservative leaders have been wholly untrustworthy, that in no way excuses the leader this government sinking to the same depths. And no, I most certainly did not vote for May, Johnson or Sunak, so my opinion isn't driven by party loyalty.

[@Liam-m3x6d]

This woman is wrong about how pensions work. You have to pay NI for 35 years to get the full state pension so it matters what you pay in. Back in 1995, very few people had internet so the women could hardly do a gov.uk search! It is the fact that they were not informed by the authorities that is the injustice not the fact that the pension age is now equal albeit unjustly high. And Angela Rayner said in 2022 that Labour would compensate these women after their pension was "stolen." Another broken promise.

[@patrickh3385]

Rachel is spot on here. Labour MPs were foolish to be photographed with WASPI campaigners even if they didn't actually promise to compensate them. However effectively the changes in state pension age were communicated or not, it's ultimately the responsibility of the individual to plan one's own retirement and check the current eligibility requirements for the state pension or any other payments from the state. I don't see why women who simply assumed the state pension age wouldn't change (either to equalise with that of men or to reflect the increase in life expectancy) should in effect be compensated for ignorance. In fact, the bigger mystery is why it took 25 years after the Equal Pay Act 1970 to legislate for equalisation of state pension age, a process that didn't complete until 2018.

[@lestrem11]

The Parliamentary Ombudsmen said they should be compensated. They might as well not have an Ombudsman if he is just routinely ignored. Labour appear to think lying to the public is acceptable behaviour. Get rid.

[@grahamnewton4381]

This is the first accurate sensible assessment of the Waspi situation. I worked in Social Security finance have read the relevant papers including the somewhat misguided Ombudsman’s report and describing the campaign as ridiculous is spot on. The women did have 15 years to adjust. Also their claim for loss of pension was dismissed by the high court as long ago as 2019. The issue picked up on in the Ombudsman’s report was in relation to individual notifications and this wasn’t and still isn’t normal practice for benefit changes. There are other factors not least the wider extremely expensive ramifications but these are complex issues. This whole thing is media inspired with the help of Conservative incompetence and Labour stupidity. It should have knocked on the head years ago.

[@eileenclark7744]

Waspi women are a minority of women and many are from a cohort who took care of elderly relatives for years and as soon as they got their pensions at 66 they lost their very tiny carers allowance. On top of this women of this age were so often underpaid compared to men especially in so called lowly jobs. It is no wonder many of them feel cheated. Some have had to use any savings on care. I feel you are not looking at the bigger picture. Describing the campaign as “ridiculous” is so narrow minded. Many individuals of this generation did not receive the “housing boom”. This comment portrays a lack of understanding from a highly privileged position.

[@ravindra7791]

Rachel is 100% right. The Waspi women are in an unfortunate situation but mainly due to their lack of financial / general awareness. And Starmer and Labour have been disingenuous for sure. And should be held to account. Hopefully its a lesson for all opposition to not promise the moon while in opposition

[@thomaspowell2043]

>> due to their lack of financial / general awareness. The DWP failed to tell them. The ombudsman made that perfectly clear. They have the right to be compensated.

[@ravindra7791]

@@thomaspowell2043 But the govt says 90% of the women knew and they got 15 years of notice to put their plans in place. In general the financial literacy is quite poor in society as the very mention of pensions puts off young people and by the time they realise they have wasted a lot of time and benefits of compounding

[@thomaspowell2043]

@@ravindra7791 Of course the government says that. So what? The government says a lot of things that arent true. You really believe everything the government says? The ombudsman says otherwise. I know who I'm more inclined to believe. John McDonnel agreed they should be compensated and pledged the money to do it bacn in 2019. Why shouldn't he not be believed over Thief Starmer?

[@simonbutler5773]

State pension is a lifelong contract between government and citizen. Therefore it is incorrect to change conditions within this period. Increasing eligibility age, for example, should only be allowed to apply to people born on or after the day the legislative change was passed. Secondly, I will laud the day when someone finally challenges neoliberal mantra that the government "can't afford" these things. Governments can raise taxes and borrow. It is about priorities, not impossibilities. It is also an illusion to think that money compensating WASPIs would be lost to the economy. An economy is effectively closed. Much of additional funds apportioned to WASPIs would almost certainly flow back into the economy. It is not, therefore, a "cost" but rather redistribution - and exactly what currently required in the UK: increase tax on wealthy to compensate WASPIs redistributes unproductive, top-end accumulated wealth to inject into productive economic activity. Don't understand why the government doesn't say: bring it on!

[@andrewrose7800]

The claim isn't the point. The point is Labour's front bench at the time supporting the campaign. Is this not another dose of bloody hypocrisy.

[@colinseeney471]

Part of the controversy is the WASPI women seem to have a misconception of what Ombudsman recommended. It's just redress for maladministration for sending out information late in the mid 2000's. Not redress for the change itself, so there's no huge payment individually, but it is large burden to the taxpayer if the whole cohort is paid up to £2k for something that was in the news years before.

[@WhizzRichardThompson]

Women (quite rightly) wanted equality. Now they've got it, at least in terms of state pension provision. So quit whining.

[@bobtuiliga8691]

Really good segment. I like how one presenter pushed back (politely) on the other. Let us make up our own minds.

[@bazjoan]

I need to correct a incorrect fact, I was given 3 months notice for the second pension change and it was 10 years notice not 15 years. The women who are affected did not get any of the benefit of the pensioners pre 1951. I understand the government problem at present, it just the malice I don't like.

[@Paul-eb4jp]

So well said Rachel.

[@annishilcock4587]

Thank you for talking straight about an unjustified greivance that the media is using, yet again, as an excuse to criticise Labour.

[@DrStrangelove-w9w]

Exactly

[@garydoherty600]

Well said Rachel. Spot on.

[@JillOsgerby]

Also don’t forget if they can do this to older women, they can do it to YOU too, maybe not financial but the deceit is an indicator of where our democracy is at.

[@jonnyb7466]

Now that I know all the facts I can't believe they think they deserve anything, but then surely Labour knew it was nonsense when they supported it in opposition. Obviously it's all political games but it's not like it was unfathomable that it would be them having to make the decision to pay out or not. If they had said at that time that it's not justifiable alongside the conservatives I feel like it would have put this issue to bed long ago and now we wouldn't have the fallout. Seems similar to the pledge against tax rises in the run up to the election - they made an active political choice to cash in on votes hoping they could weather the response when they backed out. Would it have been better just to be honest and realistic with the electorate? It's hard to know if they would have won, especially in the manner that they did, had they been upfront about these issues. What does that say about us as an electorate though if we just vote for the people telling us what we want to hear?

[@whackeryounis]

nope. no one gets elected on honesty and reality especially today with the rise of algorithms creating echo chambers of misinformation. Tell me one government that has ever been elected by stating reality? The plan is always to do what needs to be said to get into to office then us members of the general public have to hope they'll do something to help us. whoever gets in, it'll always be an unknown outcome. They all blame each other and never take accountability. It's no wonder people are so disillusioned with politics.

[@williamevans9426]

As every reputable advice site in the UK states, 'You are advised to seek professional advice before making any pension decisions'. Clearly, the WASPI Women failed to do so and now expect HMG to reward them for their carelessness.

[@macroman54]

Doh..............................WASPI women were expecting Starmer and Co. to do what they were promised.

[@user-zi7ep9jz1d]

Illegal migration costs 4 times as much each year not just a one off payment ,yet the tax payers can afford this.

[@tompage8674]

Do you have proof of that?

[@crayontom9687]

Illegal migration probably costs about £20 a year. It’s a rounding error

[@macroman54]

@@tompage8674 Apparently the 10 billion pounds of compensation was going to paid paid out over several years with the highest individual payment being just less than £3,000. In the Annual Report and Accounts 2023-24, the Home Office had an approved budget of £2 billion for asylum support and resettlement for 2024-25, which is £3.4 billion less than it spent in 2023-24. So in effect the UK spent 5.4 billion pounds in one year on asylum claims in 2023-24. I don't know if those costs include free health care such as doctors visits, dentists etc. Whereas the most of us have to pay in some part for dental treatment.

[@glassmuxxic]

Ah so one ridiculous payment justifies another? Give over.

[@janetholden1978]

I would like to know what jobs these woman were doing. I would be classed as a WASPI woman. I was notified initially that my pension age would rise to 65 then it went up to 66 and I was notified. All the women I worked with were aware as some came under the phased retirement age depending on their date of birth. You are also able to check your pension age via the DWP. Many workplace pensions also raised the age at which you could take early retirement. I wonder if these women chose to not pay a full NI stamp were not working or on benefits. The real pension losers are those on the old state pension many who are men who would have retired at 65 and worked more years than many women but are on a much lower state pension

[@macroman54]

"Many workplace pensions also raised the age at which you could take early retirement"........Many? I don't think a company can change it's rules on pensions already built up without members approval. Unlike the change of state pension date that was brought in.

[@Booyabeeba]

Hear hear Rachel! Well said. So sick of these grasping Boomers.

[@fanmadechannelnocontentmad6763]

I am 66 and I knew the rise to 65 for many years, the only issue is the move to 66 - 67 some women got very little warning. I am single never married kids etc. So I was prepared. WASPI women I thought a lot of it was a con!

[@johnholkham2420]

Remember Waspi women would have received one pension contribution year for every year they received child benefits up to the childs age of 12 , plus added years if they were a carer . Unfortunately the Country has stalled moneys dried up . The root of the problems lies as usual with George Osborne accelerating pension reforms.

[@trevorjohnhill4596]

Waspi led up the garden path by rich ones with private pensions..

[@marscentral]

I think for some there is a feeling of being done twice. First with the loss of winter fuel and then this. Whether the WASPI women deserved it sort of doesn't matter at this point. When people campaign with you, act like they're on your side, and make promises to give you money, it is always going to feel like a betrayal.

[@ajs41]

These aren't poor people. If they were, they'd still be eligible for winter fuel payment.

[@thomaspowell2043]

It's only right that they're compensated. For Starmer to call their claim "ridiculous" is an insult to them, and to the whole country really. Everyone has the right in a democracy to make a case, and for him to bat it away like that is worrying. Any one of us could be in a situation of any description, and we'd all be angry if he called what we were saying "ridiculous". Starmer is a seriously problematic, worrying PM. We need to keep our eyes open with this guy in the hot seat.

[@fastacesus8499]

Don't often find myself agreeing with the government. But this is the correct decision. All the information was available. During my working life time the pension age went up by 2 years. Do I have claim?

[@derekwhyle1884]

The majority of women born in the 50’s were able to understand what was happening with the increasing age for pension entitlement and adjust their pension planning accordingly. The WASPI women should be embarrassed at highlighting their ignorance but they aren’t. I’m a man born in the 50’s and my entitlement to winter fuel allowance rose in step with the increase in pension age so my original entitlement age of 60 became 65. Using waspi logic I’m owed £1k for the 5 years payments I missed.

[@surpriserakins9067]

Odd that it is ridiculous for people to expect that a Ombudsman's recommendation should be implemented 😮

[@HazeBell1]

It is odd isnt it? 6 years tonwork costing an absolute fortune and it was dismissed!

[@SirRuffDiamond]

As a man why should women retire earlier given they live longer and usually do less manual work doesn’t this rise in pension age not actually give the equality that was needed and are we not as individuals responsible for planning for our retirement just as we are responsible for checking for traffic when we cross the road?

[@wombata8077]

Rachel is 100% correct, thank you for making the argument

[@evildude951]

Wasn't the New Statesman's position before the election that compensation should be paid? I wonder what changed... Also more generally Ombudsman rulings are neutrally assessed and should be legally binding to the government, as they are for other Ombudsman schemes.

[@rp1692]

I don't know. But Rachel Cunliffe might be giving us her own view rather than the editorial line.

[@Oliver-fu1go]

Surely it’s good thing that they have people with a range of views at the New Statesman

[@georgethompson453]

Even people working for the DWP didn’t understand the changes as they we’re offering women NI refunds on NI contributions over 30 years even though the new qualifying rules meant you needed 35 years of NI contributions to qualify for the full state pension.

[@paulrounding5260]

Keir Starmers excuse claims the majority of those people affected were informed, I can definitely say my wife didn't receive a letter, my wife and I had £50k stolen from us.

[@anthonyclayden7717]

Good on you Rachel!

[@067captain]

I found it quite funny at the time that so many women complained. I thought women had been arguing for decades to be on an equal footing with men, and when it happened, they complained. In other words they want the good parts, not the bad. Typical! But this issue for me is about, honesty, integrity and honour. Old fashion, I know! The current front bench have all lied their way into government. That’s fine, now we know you don’t value honesty and integrity. Your word is worthless and you will say anything. As a group, you are untrustworthy, dishonest liars. Now I know.

[@pasharmsby742]

What is the point of an Ombudsman if even our own government can ignore them? For me, the fact that Labour are doing this is the problem. It appears Labour are not being fair.

[@Darren-i1w]

Life isn't fair, the poor dont pay their share of taxes, is this fair on decent people

[@Darren-i1w]

Life isn't fair, the poor dont pay their share of taxes, is this fair on decent people

[@pasharmsby742]

@@Darren-i1w It’s true that life isn’t fair, but I hope my government will act fairly, in accordance with the authorities that they have put in place. Now, any organisation told by the O to recoup customers can say ‘No, you didn’t’. They’d probably be sanctioned by the government. Who can sanction the government?

[@duncabiscuit]

Thank goodness for a sensible voice. It is ridiculous. We have all had our pension age extended. Also, many of those complaining will have final salary pensions.

[@petercandlish4398]

The real problem is hypocrisy - all those MPs who sucked up to, and promised WASPI women and now have betrayed them. Why did Labour not say this before?

[@jackmarshall2496]

It shows Labours incompetence and inability to verify feasibility, cause, and effect. It doesn't inspire confidence in their policies when very clearly they aren't capable of thinking things through to this extent.

[@francescachristy8761]

I think the acceleration of the change which became very rapid and the increase in the age to 66/67 has contributed to difficilties for many of the 10% who really didn't realise, more likely to be more vulnerable, less well educated women. Within family and friends, when elder sisters were happily retiring at 60, the added years to wait came as a huge shock for some. They had no reason to imagine they needed to check tgeir pension age. Everything around them in their family and friends was reinforcing the expectation of the age old norm to retire at 60. I think some of these individuals deserve individual assessment and have experienced genuine hardship just as is happening for pensioners whose income fakls not far above the threshold for pension credit and winter fuel allowance.

[@rp1692]

Yes, I think that's what the panel didn't address (unless my concentration just lapsed): in 2011 the Tory/Lib Dem coalition government sped up the increase in women's pension age beyond the timetable that had previously been announced.

[@francescachristy8761]

@@rp1692 brought forward and also accelerated the change. I don't recall exactly which year but that would be about right since those born in 1950 would be reaching 60 in 2010..

[@TheRepublicOfYhonai]

Yeah it is ridiculous, I'm a young person, I work hard and I will basically never be able to retire, why should I have to pay so much so they can retire when I will never be able to do the same?

[@fatbikemontage2931]

The other big problem for Labour on this issue, is they used the official recommendation when settling the pay disputes with various unions, but then fail to follow the official recommendation in this case. Which just reminds the voters, that Labour are saying there is money for train drivers for example, but not for winter fuel payments or compensation for pension faults. This is just the start of Kier Starmers plan to grow the size of the public sector and control the lives of people even more. But as Thatcher said, “The problem with Socialism, is they run out of other peoples money!”.

[@ernestthesmallholder559]

The problem is not knowing what you will receive at retirement and when it will be paid. This also stems from the fact that when we pay NI contributions which are compulsory and are not for your own pension but to be paid out for current pension withdrawals: This being as a result of the government not holding your contributions in a Sovereign wealth fund in your name for this purpose. Where will your pensions come from when you reach retirement age ? Especially with a shrinking working population. When you pay for a personal pension where contributions are invested in funds & equity. This is linked to stock share prices and dividends received from such investments. You can vary the payments to meet your expectations. Therefore, you know, at any time, how much your pension is worth and how much you can draw on retirement.

[@trevorjohnhill4596]

Labour as bad as they are will get more support by rejecting waspi begging bowl. 90% knew in 95/96 How much notice did they want?

[@kathrynkirk90]

There are alot of ignorant people commenting on this subject, mainly men.

[@ay2deet578]

3:20 textbook definition of a Ponzi scheme

[@elizabethgribben4320]

I worked 44yrs then to be told to work another 6 was a tough blow especially doing a carers job I'll be needing one now😢

[@brucehulmes]

Starmer and Co said they would seek justice for the Waspi women before the election. Starmer the human rights lawyer seems to choose which human rights are more of his concern, such as defending illegal immigrants and billing legal aid fees. Starmer is getting all lawyers a bad name or is he just exposing their double standards?

[@existentialvoid]

It’s gonna get harder and harder to defend Labour in power - they are a professional opposition party.

[@macroman54]

They are a bunch of effing liars, mind you no different than the Tories.

[@TheRip72]

@@macroman54 Opposition always oppose the government in order to win votes, regardless of the policy. Taxes pay for public services. It is impossible to pay for better services with lower taxes. This is a very simple principle. Labour = higher taxes, higher public funding/services. They will never admit to raising taxes in their manifesto because it would lose them votes, but they need to do it in order to increase public sector funding. Conservative = lower taxes, lower public funding/services. They will never admit to cutting public spending in their manifesto because that would lose them votes, but they cannot achieve lower taxes without it. So do politicians avoid admitting to things which are unpopular? Every single one of them does.

[@Its__Good]

Labour are doing the right things but ultimately paying for not having the courage to support them before they were voted into office. The biggest and most legitimate criticism against Starmer is that he is far too comfortable with lying.

[@NeilofBeeston]

I had to work another year before I could retire at 66. I had years thinking I could retire at 65 and was fairly pissed off having to work another year. Just imagine if you thought you were retiring at 60 and were told you had to work another 6 years. The women affected could have been offered something! My mother struggled in her last years at work and retired aged 59. She lived to be 82. Some of the comments made make me furious. I don’t wish ill to anyone but some of the people you have on your podcast have no idea of peoples lives and some peoples struggles with work and health.

[@dawngibson2640]

Shouldnt the discussion be with pensioners from the 50s. And those relatjves who lost loved ones before they were even able to reach pensiion age at 66. Mere observation. Im sure your point of view is well aired.

[@deadandburied7626]

It seems every week Labour makes more enemies. 😮

[@doc3row]

I could never understand why women could retire on full pension at 60, but men at 65, when the "fair sex" then went on to live ±8 years longer than the other one. Equalisation of pension ages is one of the best things that the feminist movement has ever achieved. Anything else is discrimination.

[@rjhw99]

No matter how much Rachel shouts, the matter is more complicated than her presentation of the WASPI women as greedy chancers without a leg to stand on. The parliamentary ombudsman, who conducted an independent investigation, found significant failings by the DWP that led to long delays in women being informed of the changes which in turn led to financial hardship for many. Such a one-sided presentation doesn't do much to enlighten anyone.

[@susannewton3757]

Sorry but not true. The changes were announced in the budget of 94 some 16 years before the first women were affected. As you will be aware there was no internet in 1994 so information was by tv, radio, the press and word of mouth. There were budget programmes on tv, pull out sections in newspapers. I recall people waiting budget announcements avidly for such things as changes in duty on fuel, alcohol and tax bands. In addition DWP ran information campaigns announcing these changes. The ombudsman found that a decision to inform women of the changes by individual letters was delayed and it is this delay that attracted the idea of compensation. This was not DWP usual practice and still isn’t for most changes. The WASPI campaign was at first to get back payment of pension to age 60, something that both the high court and court of appeal rejected so then it was the much lesser claim based on the findings of the ombudsman for a relatively short delay in sending the letters to the women compared to how much notice had been given. As an aside many of these women would have had other state benefits in place of a pension, invalidity, income support etc or as an adult dependent on a husband’s state payment. My own view is that they have been misled into believing large sums of money were on offer, something that should have been explained was not the case by successive governments and the WASPI organisation itself.

[@rjhw99]

@@susannewton3757 Well, you say "Sorry but not true", but then go on to confirm my point that the independent ombudsman found significant failings in the communication of the changes; it then recommended, and quantified, compensation to address such failings. I wasn't arguing at all against the concept of equalising pension ages, or that the WASPIs should necessarily receive all the compensation recommended (there may well have been some contributory negligence). However, ignoring the failings of the DWP and the findings and recommendations of an independent review doesn't seem conducive to a rounded debate on the subject either.

[@susannewton3757]

@ yes you are right but what the ombudsman said was that while it was not the practice to send out individual letters it should be, therefore change in procedure. The maladministration was a delay in introducing the change. I’m not a fan of this government but when they say by the time the letters should have been sent because of the ruling the majority of women were aware of the change because of all publicity surrounding the issue I’m inclined to agree. Any financial hardship came as a result of the change in pension age.

[@rjhw99]

@@susannewton3757 I think we're in danger of agreeing! The majority of women certainly knew that the pension age was increasing - although I think that Starmer is cherry picking the 90% figure which comes from the DWP 2006 survey - the question didn't cover whether people knew when the change was coming or if it would impact them personally. However, there is also the fact that many people ignore direct mailings from the govt (up to 75%) so it's pretty unlikely that the majority would have taken action even if they had received an individual letter 28 months before they did. Even so, some people would have acted if they had been better informed and have suffered as a result - it's just very difficult to identify those particular individuals.

[@susannewton3757]

@ oh! Let’s agree. To identify those who acted or failed to act on a mis-belief and work out what the financial loss was is near impossible especially at this late stage but if I was a WASPI woman I would feel I had been misled by both main political parties and that the WASPI group had not explained to me the details of why compensation was being recommended.

[@nyeainsbar2793]

How exactly does one ‘check’ their state pension age. Government website says mine is 67, but as said on podcast, no one believes this. I’m 50 and have a clear retirement plan, but government could just change age again.

[@user-gu1un7pb7k]

You have a clear retirement plan - isn't that exactly the problem? These women had no plan at all and claim the rug was taken from underneat them, despite 15 years of warning.

[@brianferguson7840]

​@@user-gu1un7pb7k 25 years actually. It was announced in 1994

[@Janet62LG]

@@brianferguson7840 Trouble is, it wasn't 'announced'. They were not written to. A small notification was printed in the back of the Financial Times, to give the government the excuse that it had been 'publicly announced', simply to save money (about £1 million in admin and stamps, apparently).

[@coastalsandwich]

Thank you, at last some actual sense from media on the topic. This whole campaign has been stupid and Starmer was right to dismiss it.

[@TCJones]

The Gov could do all the things we want if we would just tax the rich! the elon musk giving 70 billion to reform is the best chance we have of changing this as if we limit personal and company donatiosn to political parties to 1k per person and per company no more rich people buying power this is a grate change to end all of that!

[@grahamcook9289]

Conclusion: Starmer, Rayner, Reeves etc. are disingenuous.

[@bobson3180]

corbyn promised them 58 BILLION???

[@meatychunkz8875]

Good video

[@Kris-zn6ut]

Whats the PM's view on the taxpayers being able to afford the payments to all the countries involved in the slave trade all those years ago?

[@Poorlybobsdad]

That’s irrelevant. If you promise something in a public role, you should be honourable enough to deliver it.

[@trevorjohnhill4596]

No.

[@amandahudson2038]

Labour is revolting.

[@anthonybrown4874]

Poor communication from govetnment and the DWP is hardly a new thing it was always grossly unfair thst because you are female your state retirement age was 5 years earlier than men why the chose not to even up at 62 or 63 was pretty dumb i thought. Should I complain that mymlife expectancy is less than a woman i should retire earlier on that basis or be paid a higher rate as i wont get as muvh out of it? Its pretty much all about money and the cost to the Govetnment hence no payments.

[@helencoates-be7pd]

Doesn't she know that the parliamentary ombudsman ruled that the Waspi women should be compensated? She's talking a lot of uninformed rubbish.

[@SwatantraNandanwar]

Glad to see that Waspi women were not being attentive enough and nissed that bit about pension changes. Anyone apporachi g retiremement age should hecking up on any proposed changes that would sffect theier retirement plans.

[@peterprice642]

for Waspi women see rich farmers. They are deluded if they think they are owed special treatment to the rest of us

[@elliotlanceley7745]

Kind of agree with her, but she has deep private school energy.

[@James-pyon]

Agree with Rachel there

[@neoxenon2976]

I cannot stand Starmer, but this weak Nation of: "We want handouts", that we seem to have turned into, is really getting on my nerves and he is quite right not to give into all of it.

[@ChrisOultram]

Two years what could we do not everyone has the ability to get good jobs you. Blessed with brains I am blessed with empathy

[@mandyalexander5210]

Rachel, I listen to you regularly with respect and interest. However, to hear you casually dismiss a cohort of women with so much disrespect beggars belief from someone whom I’d always assumed holds feminist views. To be clear I am not a WASPI, never sought nor expected compensation but feel compelled to reply that you have absolutely NO IDEA what life was like for a married women in the 70’s - we did not ‘choose’ to stay at home, we had to. By the time I was able to start my own full time career (part time work at that time did not offer sickness/holiday or pension rights), I was in my 40’s - you airily mention that I had 15 years to arrange a better pension pot (had we indeed been given notice of the change, which we weren’t). My personal circumstances meant that I would have to have started from scratch, which was totally unaffordable. I could go on but suffice to say I’m very disappointed in your lack of compassion and stereotyping of a bunch of women who fought very hard for many of the rights you take for granted today. Not least because you appear to have invited a lot of misogynistic comment here. If you’d like to get some first-hand real-life knowledge of older women’s existence please do get in touch, I’d love to discuss it further with you.

[@JustTakeAMoment]

I knew about it and I'm a bloke so how can you claim that you didn't know? Utter crap. I've lost out to the tune of two years of pension but I have no claim to not knowing, it was well communicated at that time and I've kept abreast of the situation. Women wanted equality and they have it now, what is the problem?