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

jem16

Mr_Costcutter wrote: »

As for compensation. Well if it were to be paid (which I very much doubt), I do hope that all those who are making such negative comments will donate their booty to charity. Yes, and elephants might fly

If it meant that those who really do need help rather than those who have simply jumped on the bandwagon, then yes I would happily contribute that to help them.

Note - not to a charity but to actually help those in need perhaps with means tested Pension Credit or easier access to benefits for the over 60s.

I've read too many comments on various sites from women who just think it's their "entitlement" and who actually admit that they wouldn't ( or couldn't ) have done anything differently even if they hadn't stuck their head in the sand for 20 years.

t0rt0ise

Mr_Costcutter wrote: »

Good luck to all the ladies involved, and rest assured that there are many of us who neither consider you stupid or greedy!

Thank you. What happened to me was that in 2009 because my state pension age was 64.5 years I left my full-time secure employment thinking that I could manage working part-time until retirement. Then my SPA was changed to 66 so I had to find full-time work again as my savings would not have seen me through. I was very lucky to eventually find another full-time job at my age and worked there for 18 months, giving up once again when it became too much healthwise. I have now been lucky enough to find part-time employment which will see me through (I am now 61).

So for me it has all worked out in the end but it could have been very different and for many finding employment at my age would be impossible. I think I have been very lucky but I do think of those who haven't.

MoneyWorry

Mr_Costcutter wrote: »

Another embarassing story? Well, I don't think so.

As for compensation. Well if it were to be paid (which I very much doubt), I do hope that all those who are making such negative comments will donate their booty to charity. Yes, and elephants might fly

Good luck to all the ladies involved, and rest assured that there are many of us who neither consider you stupid or greedy!

It doesn't affect me so no booty involved. And it is not negative to say that once figures like £30000 are bandied around that people will lie, distort or be economic with the truth. I feel there is a minority of women born between 1953 and 1954 who will be quite badly affected. Unfortunately, their plight will never be brought to our attention, because the campaign is now mostly about the grasping majority.

jem16

t0rt0ise wrote: »

Thank you. What happened to me was that in 2009 because my state pension age was 64.5 years I left my full-time secure employment thinking that I could manage working part-time until retirement.

I've no problem with those that are finding the 2011 changes a problem, especially for those born in 1953/54. I think most on here agree with that.

Where I have an issue is with the main WASPI aim of compensation back to age 60 for all 1950s women. To ignore changes made 20 years ago and complain that they weren't personally notified is wrong.

t0rt0ise

My guess is that the parliamentary discussion will be about the 2011 changes and the rest of WASPIs arguments will be ignored. That's what the first parliamentary discussion was about. I listened to it. The only bit they got wrong was to keep on saying that free prescriptions were also affected when they aren't, they are still given from age 60 for both men and women. I thought at the time that if the MPs don't know details like that, what other things don't they have a clue about.

jem16

t0rt0ise wrote: »

The only bit they got wrong was to keep on saying that free prescriptions were also affected when they aren't, they are still given from age 60 for both men and women.

Mhairi Black also said that nobody knew about the 1995 changes - clearly wrong.

Some MPs also quoting wrong ages from the 1995 changes - yes they'd got that info from constituents but they were so busy trying to score political points that they didn't check.

I thought at the time that if the MPs don't know details like that, what other things don't they have a clue about.

They've been sent the gospel according to WASPI - even what they think they know, they don't know.

Paul_Herring

Another thread on this? :rolleyes:

I'm sorry - is there a problem with pensions? I've been on here and watching the budget since before 1995 and have never, ever, seen anything about pensions.

What have I missed?

I'm just looking forward to withdrawing my private pension at the age of 50 and getting my state pension at 65.

Once I get this sand out of my ears - can't think where it came from...


---

More seriously - even with all this discussion about it, and the recent newspaper coverage, I bet there are *still* 59 yr old women out there expecting to retire within the next 12 months.

t0rt0ise

jem16 wrote: »

Mhairi Black also said that nobody knew about the 1995 changes - clearly wrong.

Yes I think that's nonsense. I don't remember if I got personal notification and I suspect that many others will have forgotten too.

Some MPs also quoting wrong ages from the 1995 changes - yes they'd got that info from constituents but they were so busy trying to score political points that they didn't check.

I don't think particular details like that are important. The general idea that not enough notice was given from the 2011 changes has really been acknowledged by the government already.

jem16

Paul_Herring wrote: »

More seriously - even with all this discussion about it, and the recent newspaper coverage, I bet there are *still* 59 yr old women out there expecting to retire within the next 12 months.

You can bet on that.

Paul Lewis on his blog states;

The women affected were then aged 40 to 45. It is understandable that many of them, even if they read the newspapers, would have put it in the 'too far away to worry about' box.

So if they put it in that box when they read about it in newspapers, why would they have put it in any other box with personal notification from the DWP. I'm obviously missing something.

t0rt0ise

Paul_Herring wrote: »

More seriously - even with all this discussion about it, and the recent newspaper coverage, I bet there are *still* 59 yr old women out there expecting to retire within the next 12 months.

Oh there definitely are but that doesn't deflect from the real problem that the late 2011 changes have caused for some, and those people need help and support.

Too much time is spent on here talking about irrelevancies which takes away from the real problem. Isn't that true of all political discussions.. sadly!


Edit: See the post below this one, totally irrelevant.