MSE News: Pensions Minister: 'no straws to clutch to' for WASPI campaigners

Archi_Bald

FaeirieQueen wrote: »

To arrogantly state that WASPI aged women now have 'no straws to clutch to', is crass in the extreme.

He simply stated the truth, which is that he cannot offer the WASPI any straws to clutch on to. Would you prefer if he pretended he could do something to get you a pension before your SPA?

FaeirieQueen wrote: »

Given that one previous post stated she had 'lost' £48K over the six year period sounded heartbreaking.......

The maths of some of the women is highly questionable, on several accounts. The main one being that they had not been entitled to a state pension at age 60 since 1995.

FaeirieQueen wrote: »

but then MPs still have their gold-plated protected pensions.

MPs' occupational pensions have absolutely nothing to do with state pensions. State pension rules are the same for everybody.

FaeirieQueen wrote: »

I would also like to suggest that to be fair, the same MSE news reporter that met with this ill informed minister, should also ask for an interview with the WASPI campaign team to get a balanced view from the 2.6 million women who have been affected.

A balanced view from women who have vested interests? How is WASPI representing 2.6m women? The internet is littered with post from women who categorically state that WASPI do not represent them.

FaeirieQueen wrote: »

I also agree with the post which should remind MPs that 2.6 million women who have been affected either by months or in my own case 5years11months at a total cost of £47,400

Can you give us the details how you worked out that number?

FaeirieQueen wrote: »

especially those who have lost almost six years at £8,000 a year!

again, can you give us the details how you worked out that number?

FaeirieQueen wrote: »

.... a six year cliff edge

would this be the 6 year cliff edge that WASPi are suggesting those born after 1959 should be suffering?

FaeirieQueen wrote: »

, then your party will not be in government for a very long time.

Have you recently looked at any polls about voting intentions?

FaeirieQueen wrote: »

We may well now have the situation where a Polish lady comes over to the UK to do grandma duties and because she is an EU citizen quite rightly will be entitled to access to UK benefits. In England, because she might now have a small Polish pension and be classed as state retired, she may be entitled to pension credit top ups to UK levels, as well as access to an English bus pass, whereas English WASPI women will have nothing.

Are you aware that the rules for UK benefits are in a no way influenced or affected by another country's state pension arrangements?

FaeirieQueen wrote: »

Something has gone wrong

I agree. Something has gone very wrong when a group of women demands that Theresa May should be entitled to her state pension immediately, on the grounds she is now 60.

Could you tell us please how your pension demands would be financed? Last I heard was that the WASPI ask would cost at least £77 billion by 2020-21, and an unknown amount thereafter. Who is going to pay for this, and how?

Triumph13

Oh dear, here we go again. A six year difference between pension age for a 1940's women and some 1950's women, introduced gradually over several years and with decades of notice is an evil 'cliff edge' and a crime against humanity. On the other hand, an instantaneous 6 year change for women born either side of midnight on 31 December 1959 would obviously be completely fair, as is a five or six year difference for any 1950's born person foolish enough not to have a second x chromosome.
And as for the assertion that speaking to a member of WASPI would give "a balanced view from the 2.6 million women who have been affected", words fail me.

bmm78

I'm struggling to see the correlation between this statement:

FaeirieQueen wrote: »

should also ask for an interview with the WASPI campaign team to get a balanced view

...and this wall of delusional drivel:

FaeirieQueen wrote: »

should remind MPs that 2.6 million women who have been affected either by months or in my own case 5years11months at a total cost of £47,400 would do well to remember that 'hell hath no fury as a woman scorned' and that there are many, many marginal seats out there which we will remember when election times come both local & national and I personally will send every one of the Tory MPs who sits in a marginal seat the words of this Pensions Minister. I think that his crass wording will come back to haunt the Tory party who already have a very slim majority. Many MPs forced a climb down about the few hundred pounds each year to be lost by the self-employed through NI contributions in their constituencies, yet they don't seem to have grasped the point that there are many thousands of WASPI aged women in their marginals who will remember this treachery when election time comes, especially those who have lost almost six years at £8,000 a year! Think on Pensions Minister because by the time 2.6 million women have had their revenge at the ballot box, the Tories will need a very big lifeboat to stay afloat. Women of our generation have had to have a great deal of patience and if we do not get fair transitional arrangements instead of a six year cliff edge, then your party will not be in government for a very long time. Think on that over your next tea and bun discussions with reporters! Also, that in the last pension parity amendment question in parliament last year, it was stated that due to the fact Poland is now a much wealthier country, the Polish equivalent WASPI aged women, have now had their state pension reinstated at the age of 60 and a Polish woman born in 1954 now gets a state pension, even back dated to 2014, in full. We may well now have the situation where a Polish lady comes over to the UK to do grandma duties and because she is an EU citizen quite rightly will be entitled to access to UK benefits. In England, because she might now have a small Polish pension and be classed as state retired, she may be entitled to pension credit top ups to UK levels, as well as access to an English bus pass, whereas English WASPI women will have nothing. Something has gone wrong when MPs want to protect the rights of 3.2 million EU citizens in Britain, but won't extend that right to English women who get no bus passes yet Scottish women, London women & some Welsh women get a bus pass at the age of 60. There is a great anomaly here which needs to be righted and soon.

There appears to be a major misconception that a seat that was "marginal" in 2015 will remain marginal at the next election. Even members of the shadow cabinet do not believe that they have a chance of winning the next election. The Copeland by-election saw a swing of 6% from Labour to the Tories, resulting in the first by-election gain by a government since 1982 and the loss of an area that has been steadfastly Labour since 1935. Where was the Waspi factor then?

Poland is an economic basket case and has a life expectancy that is 5 years less than the UK. The notion that the UK should take any notice at all of the Poles, much less try to emulate them, is incredibly one of the least absurd things you have posted.

Triumph13

bmm78 wrote: »

Poland is an economic basket case and has a life expectancy that is 5 years less than the UK. The notion that the UK should take any notice at all of the Poles, much less try to emulate them, is incredibly one of the least absurd things you have posted.

If we are looking for 'transitional arrangements' that would be affordable, one way tickets to Poland start from about £15 plus taxes...

bmm78

Triumph13 wrote: »

If we are looking for 'transitional arrangements' that would be affordable, one way tickets to Poland start from about £15 plus taxes...

Cheaper than a first-class ticket to London Euston!

Silvertabby

FaerieQueen - a quick history lesson for you. When the State pension age for women was reduced from 65 to 60 in the early 1940s, it was for one reason and one reason only - to facilitate the payment of the married man's State pension to men who had reached 65, but who could only draw the single man's pension until his (usually 3 to 5 years younger) wife had also reached State pension age. It was not meant to pay women their State pension earlier than men - because (war work apart) married women didn't work outside the home and so didn't accrue pension benefits in their own right. When this went through Parliament, a few dissenters claimed that single women, who had no choice but to work, would unduly benefit - but this was over-ruled on the basis that the benefit to married men was more important than the benefit to single women. Plus, of course, it was the norm to pay women far, far less then their male counterparts, so single women would probably have to continue working beyond State pension age regardless.

Roll on to 1975 and the Sex Equality Act. Harold Wilson earned the ladies' votes with this Act, which paved the way for equal rights and equal pay - but he omitted to address the equal pensions bit, probably because he knew it would be a vote loser. Instead, he did a slopey and left that inevitable decision to the Tories to sort out.

In hindsight, the re-equalisation of State pension ages should have been part of the 1975 Act. That way State pension age for women could have been increased far more gradually - perhaps a gradual 1 year per decade from 1985?

However, this was a lost chance and we have to move on. The re-equalisation of State pension ages was first announced in the 1993 Budget - and then widely advertised in the media/women's magazines/etc from 1995. Even if women didn't read newspapers/magazines or watch the news, I remember the details being chewed over at length in the shops, at work and at the hairdressers.

I'm a woman, born in 1956, and despair at the antics of WASPI.

OldMusicGuy

Silvertabby wrote: »

I'm a woman, born in 1956, and despair at the antics of WASPI.

Great post and well said. My wife, born in 1957, was also well aware of the upcoming changes and does not spend her life on forums like this. This change was obvious to anyone that was prepared to take a bit of personal responsibility for their own financial affairs.

AnotherJoe

FaeirieQueen wrote: »

I would like to suggest that this article does not reflect the truth about the hardships being faced by many women born in the 1950's and that the minister's comments are disingenous about the facts surrounding the supposed reasons for pension parity in both bills put through the Commons dated 1995 & 2011. To arrogantly state that WASPI aged women now have 'no straws to clutch to', is crass in the extreme. Given that one previous post stated she had 'lost' £48K over the six year period sounded heartbreaking but then MPs still have their gold-plated protected pensions. I would also like to suggest that to be fair, the same MSE news reporter that met with this ill informed minister, should also ask for an interview with the WASPI campaign team to get a balanced view from the 2.6 million women who have been affected. I also agree with the post which should remind MPs that 2.6 million women who have been affected either by months or in my own case 5years11months at a total cost of £47,400 would do well to remember that 'hell hath no fury as a woman scorned' and that there are many, many marginal seats out there which we will remember when election times come both local & national and I personally will send every one of the Tory MPs who sits in a marginal seat the words of this Pensions Minister. I think that his crass wording will come back to haunt the Tory party who already have a very slim majority. Many MPs forced a climb down about the few hundred pounds each year to be lost by the self-employed through NI contributions in their constituencies, yet they don't seem to have grasped the point that there are many thousands of WASPI aged women in their marginals who will remember this treachery when election time comes, especially those who have lost almost six years at £8,000 a year! Think on Pensions Minister because by the time 2.6 million women have had their revenge at the ballot box, the Tories will need a very big lifeboat to stay afloat. Women of our generation have had to have a great deal of patience and if we do not get fair transitional arrangements instead of a six year cliff edge, then your party will not be in government for a very long time. Think on that over your next tea and bun discussions with reporters! Also, that in the last pension parity amendment question in parliament last year, it was stated that due to the fact Poland is now a much wealthier country, the Polish equivalent WASPI aged women, have now had their state pension reinstated at the age of 60 and a Polish woman born in 1954 now gets a state pension, even back dated to 2014, in full. We may well now have the situation where a Polish lady comes over to the UK to do grandma duties and because she is an EU citizen quite rightly will be entitled to access to UK benefits. In England, because she might now have a small Polish pension and be classed as state retired, she may be entitled to pension credit top ups to UK levels, as well as access to an English bus pass, whereas English WASPI women will have nothing. Something has gone wrong when MPs want to protect the rights of 3.2 million EU citizens in Britain, but won't extend that right to English women who get no bus passes yet Scottish women, London women & some Welsh women get a bus pass at the age of 60. There is a great anomaly here which needs to be righted and soon.

I would like to suggest you use paragraphs so your rants are readible. (at least I presume its a rant, I didn't read it.

Malthusian

miller wrote: »

This is a question of trust. Do you trust whatever government(s) in charge between now and the time you take your benefits not to make any changes (e.g. these women the article relates to, scraping dividend tax relief, retrospective student loan changes etc.)?

The changes to the pension system in recent history have affected an individual's ability to put more money into a pension scheme but the money already in the pension scheme has not been adversely affected. The opposite, in fact - the pension freedoms changes and the changes to tax on death benefits were very positive for money already in pensions.

The changes to state pension age reinforce the case for making private provision.

Do you trust the financial solvency of the pension provider and the government promises to make good if they go bust (e.g. some dodgy auto-enrollement schemes, Equitable Life etc.)?

As nearly everyone saving into a pension nowadays will be putting their money into defined contribution pensions, and more specifically into unit-linked pension funds, the solvency of the pension provider is irrelevant.

dunstonh

I would like to suggest that this article does not reflect the truth about the hardships being faced by many women born in the 1950's

The image of the WASPI leaders taking their train journey home in first class the other day really highlights those hardships.

Given that one previous post stated she had 'lost' £48K over the six year period sounded heartbreaking

Its not heartbreaking. Half the population missed out on that sort of amount just by being born male rather than female.

but then MPs still have their gold-plated protected pensions.

Ahh, so you are jealous. You are not sticking to facts but instead have a spiteful jealousy of others. What MPs get on their pension is irrelevant to the state pension. MPs qualify under exactly the same state pension rules as everyone else.

I also agree with the post which should remind MPs that 2.6 million women who have been affected either by months or in my own case 5years11months at a total cost of £47,400 would do well to remember that 'hell hath no fury as a woman scorned' and that there are many, many marginal seats out there which we will remember when election times come both local & national and I personally will send every one of the Tory MPs who sits in a marginal seat the words of this Pensions Minister.

Who are you going to vote for? You say it will not be Conservative. It can't be Labour as they commissioned the report and supported the changes and passed the law in 2007 to raise the state pension age to 68. It can't be Libdems as they were in power with the Conservatives for the second change and supported them. So, by all means vote for some minor irrelevance and waste your vote.

that there are many thousands of WASPI aged women in their marginals who will remember this treachery when election time comes, especially those who have lost almost six years at £8,000 a year!

What about the women that have gained under the changes? Do you want them to lose their money?
The self employed women who now qualify for the full state pension and not just the basic. Shall we take that away?
The women who get more under the 35 year rule than the 40 year qualification it used to be. Shall we take theirs away?

Think on Pensions Minister because by the time 2.6 million women have had their revenge at the ballot box, the Tories will need a very big lifeboat to stay afloat.

As the WASPI witches won't be voting for any credible alternative, that will not make any difference in the majority of seats. So, its an empty threat.

Women of our generation have had to have a great deal of patience and if we do not get fair transitional arrangements instead of a six year cliff edge, then your party will not be in government for a very long time.

i don't expect you to be following current affairs because if you had, you would have known about the changes in the early 90s. However, as things currently stand, the Conservative party are on track to stay in power for a long time.

Think on that over your next tea and bun discussions with reporters! Also, that in the last pension parity amendment question in parliament last year, it was stated that due to the fact Poland is now a much wealthier country, the Polish equivalent WASPI aged women, have now had their state pension reinstated at the age of 60 and a Polish woman born in 1954 now gets a state pension, even back dated to 2014, in full.

Poland is very different. They gave little warning (2014). The UK gave 20 years notice and was under consultation for nearly 5 years on top of that. The revised changes in Poland also give shorter timescales to what the UK started in the early 90s. (Poland phases between 2020 and 2040 based on intention made in 2014 - UK gave 20 years notice of the change)
So, well done. Your example of what Poland and how you think it is a good solution indicates you must approve of what the UK did given the UK did it over a longer timescale.

There is a great anomaly here which needs to be righted and soon.

There was a great anomaly and it was corrected in 1995.