Sign the Petition for Womens state pension age going up unfair

Figgerty

MoneyWorry wrote: »

Do you actively build up credits from spending all your time in the pub, because that's all they seemed to do on Corrie when I watched it.

The info campaign should be on Corrie as you even watch it. It would reach people of all ages, classes, wealth, and know it alls.

jem16

Goldiegirl wrote: »

Women in their late 50's to early 60's - that's not elderly at all. It's a well known fact that 'elderly' is 20 years older than the age you are now.

Well I certainly don't look on myself as "elderly" - far from it!

Figgerty

After posting on this thread for a day, I now believe I know who is posting derogatory remarks under #Waspi. Most of you posting on here are masters. Are you paid to derail the #Waspi campaign.

jem16

Figgerty wrote: »

Are you paid to derail the #Waspi campaign.

Why does everyone connected with Waspi believe that anyone having an alternative viewpoint is trying to derail them?

Figgerty

jem16 wrote: »

You seem to be misunderstanding.

The original Act was going to see a 2 year hike for those born late 1953 and all of 1954. After various protests and work by Ros Altmann, that 2 year hike was lowered to 18 months when the Act eventually became law.

As far as the government is concerned, transitional arrangements were given by the reductions of 6 months at a cost of £1.1bn.

This is why they are steadfastly refusing to look at it again, especially in the face of a campaign that wants to have an effective spa of 60 but ONLY for 1950s women.

No misunderstanding. The same women effected by the 1995 Act were hit again by the 2011 Act . That is a fact.

I was due to get SP at age 63¾ under the 1995 Act. The 2011 Act changed it to 65½. Same woman hit by the changes in both Acts. Spin it any way you wish but that is the situation.

Do you want me to take consolation from the fact it could have been 66 years?

Daniel54

saver861 wrote: »

In addition, this has now gone too far for the government to ignore it. Altmann herself was a campaigner for these women before she too office. The size, scale and scope of the campaign means that total refusal by the government would be playing poker with a doggy hand.

I think you kid yourself if you think the campaign has any serious traction.Lots of sympathetic words but no explicit support for their ask unless you count Mhairi Black's repetition of WASPI 's indignant assertionl that their ask is totally different from Ros Altmann's assertion that the women wish to roll back the 1995 Act.

https://www.sundaypost.com/news/political-news/mhairi-black-pledges-to-continue-pensions-fight/

I would encourage you to have a look at Twitter,which is the WASPI heartland.It is pretty grubby and leaves no doubt that the core of the campaign is about 1995,lack of notice and compensation.You might want to start by looking up John Ralfe's page to see the responses to the article I linked to,and also to Ros Altmann's,who encouraged by the WASPI leaders, is subject to a constant stream of vilification and ill informed criticism.I find it pretty shocking ,tbh.

Ros Altmann has indeed campaigned for women's state pension,but not against the 1995 Act. You are correct however that for any group or individual she is the most powerful potential supporter within government ( other than GO or DC) of changes to the 2011 provisions.WASPI has gone out of its way to alienate her ,and that tells me everything I need to know about their interest in advancing any sensible amelioration of the 2011 Act.

Figgerty

jem16 wrote: »

Why does everyone connected with Waspi believe that anyone having an alternative viewpoint is trying to derail them?

That is the way it seems. Picking holes in the way they are conducting THEIR campaign seems to be a hobby here. Why do you think the Government have several readings of a bill? Nobody, gets things rright first time. Perhaps the experts on here do.

jem16

Figgerty wrote: »

No misunderstanding. The same women effected by the 1995 Act were hit again by the 2011 Act . That is a fact.

One which I have not disputed.

I was due to get SP at age 63¾ under the 1995 Act. The 2011 Act changed it to 65½. Same woman hit by the changes in both Acts. Spin it any way you wish but that is the situation.

So from that you're a late 1953 birthday, possibly early 1954 birthday. The increase you would have had was 2 years according to earlier versions of the 2011 Act. This was reduced to 18 months.

I still don't think it's fair and as you had less than 10 years notice, you have a very good point for having it changed. I've never said any differently and I stand by that.

Those born between April 1953 and November 1956 have reason to be annoyed and I hope some further transitional arrangements can be made.

I also believe that there are genuinely some people who are suffering severe hardship due to these changes and really didn't know about the 1995 Act. However these are in the minority and could be helped with a minimum income plan.

What I don't agree with and will continue to disagree with is the main Waspi aim of effective spa of 60 for ALL 1950s women regardless of circumstances. I make no apology for that.

jem16

Figgerty wrote: »

That is the way it seems. Picking holes in the way they are conducting THEIR campaign seems to be a hobby here. Why do you think the Government have several readings of a bill? Nobody, gets things rright first time. Perhaps the experts on here do.

The "experts" on here know an awful lot more than the Waspi founders could even dream about.

There have been many knowledgeable and influential people who would have been more than happy to help out with a properly run campaign that looked to help those most in need. These people have been attacked and abused simply because they do not believe that every 1950s women deserves to be compensated as if the 1995 Act had never happened.

If WASPI had bothered to listen, something may indeed have happened with the 2011 Act but it's looking less and less likely and all because of a group of greedy women. Even their own supporters are turning on them and accusing them of feathering their own nests rather than looking at what their supporters actually want.

Picking holes in the way they are conducting THEIR campaign seems to be a hobby here

Holes are being picked here as people actually have the knowledge which is very sadly lacking in Waspi. Unlike on Twitter and Facebook we're more than happy and capable of debating.

Figgerty

Goldiegirl wrote: »

This comment from Figgerty was posted on the parliamentary thread


I didn't comment on that thread, as I didn't want to derail it.

But, elderly? Really?

Women in their late 50's to early 60's - that's not elderly at all. It's a well known fact that 'elderly' is 20 years older than the age you are now.

In fact, I've gone back to thinking Figgerty must be a man. No woman, of any age would include herself in a group labelled elderly!:rotfl:

At 62, I am past middle age & see myself as elderly. Perhaps elderly may be insulting to some but I could have called them old. I see elderly as 60 - 80 and after that old. The state pension used to be called the Old Age Pension. Some people still call it that although the #WASPI publicity is changing that.