We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
MSE News: Government refuses to budge on women's state pension changes
Comments
-
bowlhead99 wrote: »Presumably to use the analogies you put forward above, if MSE want to get famous as well as improving public education they should next come out in support of a "let's legislate that the world is flat" campaign with petition.
Well, lets just examine your theory here.
Now suppose you believe passionately the world is flat. You know that people think the world is round but that puts us in great peril. The world is flat and there is a grave danger if too many dudes build more buildings at one end of the world then it will get too heavy at that end. The real danger then is that it will weigh down at that end and the poor urchins at the other end are going to get flipped into space, never to be heard of again!!!
You start your petition to free the world of this great peril. Indeed, a man of your stature, I would expect nothing less.
Now, me here, I know as far as possible the world is round. I know its not flat and I know your petition is a non runner. I'm not going to sign it. If you can't convince enough peeps then your petition will get nowhere.
Now MSE has the choice of whether to back it or not. They will presumably use their initiative and intellect before coming to a decision.
Regardless of MSE supporting your petition or not, if the masses start debating it and twitter etc starts getting busy on the subject then those who were unaware before might be convinced one way or the other.bowlhead99 wrote: »To my mind, that is the point Dunstonh is making while you seem to think it is fine for them to support any issue. Of course they have that right, but the right is earned and the right becomes less valuable if credibility is doubted.
Yes we all agree they have the right to support or not. I'm saying that they should not be influenced by the opinions of posters in that decision. If its a truly preposterous proposal, such as the world being triangular then I'm assuming MSE will not back it.bowlhead99 wrote: »At the moment I take MSE as being more credible than the Daily Mail or the Sun, on financial matters. Likely the government does too. That may not always be the case if they focus on popularity over substance.
But where you and the right honourable dunstonh are incorrect, would be in that it is merely popularity over substance. The majority agree, including myself, that the WASPI intention to get the 1995 policy changed would not happen - thus it is not the popular opinion.
It seems only those who object to the WASPI campaign are the ones that think MSE should not have supported it.bowlhead99 wrote: »IMHO.
Which part of your opinion was humble???
I shall now give way to my right honourable friend .......0 -
I voted for this:
"Petition
Make fair transitional state pension arrangements for 1950’s women
The Government must make fair transitional arrangements for all women born on or after 6th April 1951 who have unfairly borne the burden of the increase to the State Pension Age (SPA). Hundreds of thousands of women have had significant changes imposed on them with a lack of appropriate notification "
Richard Graham, Chair of the All Party Group on Pensions misrepresented the petition and undermined petitioners by choosing to include demands that weren't in the petition.
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/whall/?id=2016-02-01a.249.0&s=speaker%3A24921#g256.1He didn't misrepresent anything.
He simply stated the "ask" as quoted on Facebook and by Anne Keen ( one of the co founders of Waspi ) to the Work and Pensions Select Committee of which he is a member.
You are correct in that it should not have been there but the Waspi Campaign put it out there and refused to remove it despite requests from supporters as they were quite clear that that was what they wanted.
If any misrepresentation was going on, it was all at Waspi's end.
WASPI should have been clear on all forms of media what their 'asks' were and they should have stuck to them instead of changing them willy-nilly.0 -
As explanation above.As for the £20m - I was referring to Martins take - which I thought was around £20-£30m.Well I was referring to £20 just for the domain registration0
-
POPPYOSCAR wrote: »I get exactly what you are saying.
I had never heard of WASPI until I stumbled across the petition on here and the subsequent posts and discussions sparked my interest.
Precisely. It seems the point is loss on some.I still don't know who you are referring to.
As above, and further above in earlier posts.... if you ain't got it by now .....who got the other £57-67m?
Well I ain't Martin Lewis' accountant unfortunately but I thought he collected around £20-30m in cash. Another £20 or so million in shares and another £20-30 million in future payments.
I don't really have the detail so I think you need to direct your quessies to Martin or his accountant for the specifics.I can't say I have seen that Martin said anywhere he paid £20 for the initial domain registration, but if he did, he probably paid for 20 years, or he got a dreadful deal.
Maybe he forgot to shop around ......0 -
Goldiegirl wrote: »WASPI have changed their Facebook page and their 'ask' has disappeared (for the time being at least)
They have previously been asked what would success look like for them? What is the solution they are looking for? (Q60 in oral evidence given to the WPSC)
Previously, they had at least an answer for this, as Anne Keen duly demonstrated at the time. Now they have nothing concrete, or at least not anything that they'd like their supporters and the general public to know.
They might consider their FB update a strategic masterstroke in their campaign but in reality they are totally on the backfoot and in quite a desperate muddle now.Goldiegirl wrote: »They now appear to be campaigning for all women born after 6th April 1951 - not just 50's women.0 -
Well I ain't Martin Lewis' accountant unfortunately but I thought he collected around £20-30m in cash. Another £20 or so million in shares and another £20-30 million in future payments.
That would make some £60m-£80m, at lot closer to the actual sale value, and a huge amount more than what you originally claimed the value of the business was around the time of sale.10 years later its value is £20,000,000.
Whilst it doesn't matter one jot to the WASPI debate how much MSE was or is worth, I thought it worth pointing out that figures need to be challenged, as do words.0 -
I noticed this as well, and I think it's actually a step backwards for them
Oh dear .... they are going backwards ...They might consider their FB update a strategic masterstroke in their campaign but in reality they are totally on the backfoot and in quite a desperate muddle now.
Oh no ... worse than I thought then ....Looks just another sloppy mistake to me,
Yet another sloppy mistake ...
How on this round earth did they get anywhere ......
Then again .... this is what your right honourable friend Mr Richard Graham said ...
Thank you, Mr Stringer. In conclusion, the WASPI campaign has been well put together, and the e-petition has been a great success; that is why we are all here. I congratulate WASPI. All the points made by the campaign about communication in the past will have been noted and largely accepted by almost everybody in the House.
hmmm ..... there seems to be a division in the house on the merits of the WASPI campaign ..... lordy lord ....0 -
So how did WASPI get the campaign to where it is?The point being missed by so many is that actually, it is not WASPI that generated their publicity, but the 'opposition' to WASPI.
If those who had opposed WASPI had kept quiet, it would never have gotten to where it is now.
The campaign in terms of getting the issue into the public domain has been entirely successful. It has now had coverage in all areas of the media and two debates in the HoC. That is down mainly to those who opposed it and wanted to shout louder. Had they stayed silent, so too would the campaign have been silent and mostly unheard of!!0 -
I noticed this as well, and I think it's actually a step backwards for them as now they don't articulate at all how they would see the "fair transition" to work.
The "ask" has not changed - it's just been moved. It's now in the Notes section.
https://www.facebook.com/notes/waspi-women-against-state-pension-inequality-campaign/welcome-to-waspi/987711544622659?__mref=messageWelcome to WASPI
.
4 February 2016 at 13:03
Please read this post in its entirety before posting any comments - it will help you navigate the page, post in the appropriate thread and keep the page orderly.
Who are WASPI? 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. What is our ask? "WASPI ask the Government to put all women born in the 50s, or after 6th April 1951 and affected by the changes to the state pension age in the same financial position they would have been in had they been born on or before 5th April 1950". All we are asking is to give us what we are entitled to. All we are asking is for the Government to meet with us.
As previously mentioned we are an action group and not a chit chat group. Therefore, we expect you to join us in taking positive action to raise a further awareness of and generate more support for our campaign, your campaign. Speaking with your MP is imperative. For your convenience we’ve named and capitalised each "thread" (Post) e.g. MEET YOUR MP, PERSONAL STORIES, BUDDY UP.
We'd appreciate it if you stick to the Topic of the thread - it makes life easier for us admins and your fellow supporters. Please take a few minutes to scroll through the entire page to see what Topics are covered.
In an attempt to keep some form of order on the page posts/comments that are irrelevant/off topic/not in line with House Rules will be deleted. This is something we’d rather not have to do so would really appreciate your co-operation on this.
Want to know more about WASPI? Go to About section - top of page, under banner (please read House Rules). Lots of info in NOTES section too e.g. COUNTER ARGUMENTS WHEN MEETING YOUR MP. Please read carefully. It'll save time asking us "where can I find ..................." N.B. the entire contents of the page may not be fully displayed if you are viewing on and iPad etc.
We are totally autonomous from any other group and therefore this page is devoted to and will focus purely upon our campaign. 3 of the 5 WASPI co-founders Lin, Marion and Anne are the administrators of this page and aim to respond to messages within 24hrs.
The other 2 co-founders, Celia and Doreen, continue to work tirelessly behind the scenes. Thanks once again for supporting our campaign.
Please sign and share, share, share our petition at every opportunity - simply click on the link below.
Thanks - Onwards and Upwards!
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/110776
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/110776
Does look like an attempt to hide it so that they can gain the support of Tory MPs.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 351.9K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.1K Spending & Discounts
- 244.9K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.5K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.4K Life & Family
- 258.7K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards