MSE News: Government refuses to budge on women's state pension changes 3 February 2016 at 6:51PM in Pensions, Annuities & Retirement Planning 90 replies 10.4K views

MSE_Luke

The Government has refused to budge on changes to the state pension that will hit hundreds of thousands of women aged 55-65 as MPs hold a second debate...

Read the full story:
'Government refuses to budge on women's state pension changes as MPs hold second debate'

Click reply below to discuss. If you haven’t already, join the forum to reply. If you aren’t sure how it all works, read our New to Forum? Intro Guide.

mystic_trev

Unfortunately the pressure group WASPI (who started the Petition) didn't stick to their original remit of campaigning against the 2011 changes. These are unfair, and they'd have had a much better chance of some success, had they.

saver861

Back to square one then.

dunstonh

The Government responded correctly based on the mess WASPI made of their campaigning. You do feel that had the campaign focused solely on the generally regarded unfair acceleration in 2011, there may well have been a different outcome.

OldBeanz

Along with arguing that women had missed the 1995 change in pension dates; blaming the 1995 Tory government rather than any since; that men were the victims of inequality; that the matter had been reviewed in 2011; that this will all be forgotten by the time of the next popularity pole; and that GO was never going to give any money; they did well.

tgroom57

My take on it is that they were having a whinge. I've seen no sensible, actionable proposals that could alleviate the situation. To obtain a good outcome you need to have a reasonable, actionable alternative to suggest - whether you're complaining about a pair of faulty shoes or the withholding of the first 6 years of your state pension.

zagfles

tgroom57 wrote: »

My take on it is that they were having a whinge. I've seen no sensible, actionable proposals that could alleviate the situation. To obtain a good outcome you need to have a reasonable, actionable alternative to suggest - whether you're complaining about a pair of faulty shoes or the withholding of the first 6 years of your state pension.

One sensible proposal which was mentioned in one of the debates was to keep the pension credit age as per the 1995 timetable (pension credit age follows the female state pension age but applies to men too).

This would have helped the worst affected, and it wouldn't have been too costly. But it was drowned out by WASPI's ridiculous demand to turn the clock back for all 1950's women.

SnowMan

Nearly 14,000 disabled people have mobility cars taken away

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35476904

Despite being an amputee with spina bifida, who is only able to take a few steps, Christine Mitchell did not score the points she needed to keep her Motability car.

An example of real hardship resulting from Government policies.

Perhaps MSE could cover this rather than this nonsense WASPI self-interested campaign for women born in the 1950s to get their state pensions from age 60, for reasons that simply don't stand up to scrutiny (albeit the 2011 changes were with too little notification and it is reasonable to challenge these)

The WASPI women talk of compelling stories of hardship of having to live off savings or rely on a partner's earnings, because they are not being allowed their state pensions from age 60 and aren't being given sufficiently preferential treatment over males or those born later than them.

From Work and Pensions Committee oral evidence
Lin Phillips: Absolutely, yes. We have lots and lots of really compelling stories. If you are out of the labour market in your 60s it is impossible, virtually, to get back in. Some women are finding you can sign on for Jobseeker’s allowance maybe for six months and if it is income based, if you have a partner, then you do not get an income after that. When you have been used to working all your life and you are not contributing, that has a knock-on effect on relationships, on how you feel. I know if I wake up in the morning and I do not have any work, it is the first thing I think of because I am not contributing, so you are using your savings.

What a contrast to the hardship of those individuals who are having their motability vehicles taken off them just because the medical assessments for PIP are not being done correctly.

Those individuals whose mobility lifelines are being taken away aren't asking for preferential treatment they are asking for the simple adaptations that allow them to do the normal things that the rest of us take for granted.

atush

And what about the 60% reversal on appeal?

son considerably less?

colsten

mystic_trev wrote: »

Unfortunately the pressure group WASPI (who started the Petition) didn't stick to their original remit of campaigning against the 2011 changes. These are unfair, and they'd have had a much better chance of some success, had they.

Did they ever only campaign against 2011? AFAIK, their FB page always said "We are an action group campaigning against the unfair changes to the State Pension Age imposed on women born on or after 6th April 1951 (and how the changes were implemented). This includes both the 1995 and 2011 Pension Acts.". And if that wasn't clear enough, they always called for the full pension money for their cohort from age 60, which clearly means they also campaigned against 1995. Even the official Petition text referred to 1995.

But leaving that aside: I am delighted the government held firm against their ridiculous demands. Should be interesting what they will try next. Talks of demos and chaining themselves to the gates of Buckingham Palace have been some of the less insane thoughts floated on Facebook and Twitter, so the entertainment value seems secured for some time yet.

Debt_Free_Chick

It seems to me that they are attempting to hold the Government to ransom, without having a viable hostage. What's the worse they could do?

Silly tactics