MSE News: ’Women's state pension petition secures second Parliamentary debate

saver861

bowlhead99 wrote: »

I didn't see the debate myself, too busy working to build up my NI credits.

Good lad.... keep it up. These will be going to my pension soon .... much obliged

POPPYOSCAR

Watching the whole debate.


Just gone out for a revision. Reconvene in 15mins.


Very impressed by the women speakers in particular.




Finished now. Very interesting.

POPPYOSCAR

Goldiegirl wrote: »

Josephine Cumbo is tweeting the main points of the debate - may be better than watching it!

MP Richard Graham has talked some sense.

I found him arrogant and condescending.


What has his wife and sisters being in their 50s have anything to do with the debate?

zagfles

POPPYOSCAR wrote: »

I found him arrogant and condescending.


What has his wife and sisters being in their 50s have anything to do with the debate?

He was declaring an interest as some others did.

POPPYOSCAR

zagfles wrote: »

He was declaring an interest as some others did.

What interest is that then?


I imagine they are well provided for so irrelevant to the debate.

zagfles

POPPYOSCAR wrote: »

What interest is that then?

Err... that any change may benefit his household. The woman who moved the debate declared an interest as well. It's a usual thing to do.

mazzy

I was born in October 1953 so I fall into the group being discussed. The question I would like answered is why when the cut off point to get pension at 63 was in April and I was 6 months past that why was my pension age raised to 64 yrs 9 mths. It would have seemed much fairer to me to raise it by the 6months. I completely understand the raise in age had to happen but the transitional period could have been fairer.

POPPYOSCAR

zagfles wrote: »

Err... that any change may benefit his household. The woman who moved the debate declared an interest as well. It's a usual thing to do.

So his sisters are his household?

POPPYOSCAR

mazzy wrote: »

I was born in October 1953 so I fall into the group being discussed. The question I would like answered is why when the cut off point to get pension at 63 was in April and I was 6 months past that why was my pension age raised to 64 yrs 9 mths. It would have seemed much fairer to me to raise it by the 6months. I completely understand the raise in age had to happen but the transitional period could have been fairer.

This is the whole basis of the debate.


Everyone was in agreement that it should be equalised but most were unhappy about how it has been implemented.

zagfles

mazzy wrote: »

I was born in October 1953 so I fall into the group being discussed. The question I would like answered is why when the cut off point to get pension at 63 was in April and I was 6 months past that why was my pension age raised to 64 yrs 9 mths. It would have seemed much fairer to me to raise it by the 6months. I completely understand the raise in age had to happen but the transitional period could have been fairer.

Yes you're one of the worst affected as your state pension age went up about 15 months (over the 1995 act) with only 6 years notice. You have a valid cause for complaint but unfortuantely it's been drowned by WASPI's ridiculous OTT demand of putting all 50's women in the same position as it they'd been born before 1950 ie all to have a state pension age of 60.