AIBU in thinking the government have made the correct decision not to blanket pay all WASPI women £3k? This goes against the Ombudsman recommendations to pay between £1k-3k to every WASPI women.

[caringcarer]

At the time it was in every newspaper for weeks, in the radio and on the TV news a lot of coverage via the media. Most women of this age agree they knew about pension age changes. At the time it was huge. I fail to understand how any women could not have known unless they lived off grid. No individual letters were sent out to the women who would be affected. The Ombudsman's recommendation was that a blanket payment of between £1k-3k be paid to all WASPI women. Labour have just announced no money will be paid out at all. It would have cost the taxpayer up to £10.5 billion pounds on top of the huge amount of my ney it has cost to review it for several years. It is money that the government just don't have. Assuming lessons have been learned and any future changes will see DWP send out letters to any individuals who it will directly affect. The only worry is that it sets a precedent of ignoring what the Ombudsman's recommendations.

I am disappointed for them. Labour MPs including Angela Raynor have been vocal in their support for the Waspi campaign and the ombudsman did find that the decision wasn't communicated well and the women should be compensated. It is not easy to find employment in your sixties so those who didn't know about this change have been left in some very difficult circumstances.

We do if it’s the reason for a government change of heart.

I completely agree, but I think you and others are missing my point.

It's possible to realise and accept that your generation is going to have to bear a double burden, because things have changed, and at the same time to challenge the thinking that says you're not being treated more harshly than those who came before you. It would help enormously if people said 'we understand why you feel aggrieved and we agree that there's some unfairness there, but it's inevitable'. That's very different to saying 'tough, we're all in the same boat'. We are not. Whichever generation has to bear the brunt of a switch from current workers paying for existing pensioners, to everybody paying for themselves, has drawn the short end of the stick.

You took the words right out of my mouth with what you've said here 'EmmaMaria'. I am just in the Waspi cohort, and things were incredibly different when we were younger. I think it likely that the vast majority of Mums on here, are far better informed on just about every subject, than women who were born in the 1950's.

@EmmaMaria if Amazon are not servicing their legitimate tax obligations, that's tax evasion which is a criminal offence. If you have evidence to support this you should report it to the NCA or HMRC.

Giving money to these women, who have had to simply work a little bit longer until they got their pension (but not as long as I will have to do) would be totally ridiculous given all of the other things it could and should be spent on.

Considering the majority of unpaid carers are women and 1 in 4 unpaid carers are living in poverty, I’d like to see how you could live on carers allowance of £81 per week for the next 6 years? (Bearing in mind many carers can’t do any paid work due to their caring responsibilities and spousal carers over 65 are iirc 23% more likely to have a stroke than the “normal population). We have one of the, if not the lowest pension in Europe; but it would still be way more than carers allowance!

I personally consider the money spent on wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Ukraine to name but a few and nothing to do with us; Covid (billions wasted on furlough, Test and Trace, PPE); overseas aid (one big slush fund); bailing out the banks, Quantitative Easing and Carbon Capture all to be a massive waste of money against which, £10 billion on WASPI women is a drop in the ocean! During Covid, people on furlough should have just got benefits at the same level as everyone else, seeing as the working population vote for that for other people, so they must consider it enough to live on!

The government saved £181 billion by raising women’s pension age to the same as men, so £10 billion would still be a massive saving!

I doubt that the majority of Waspi women are unpaid carers. I would rather money was given directly to all unpaid carers rather than just Waspi women

'Dim' may be the operative word.
The ladies I know all had a moan about it at the time.
We should be more worried that our children may never receive a state pension despite paying into the system.

'people bandying figures about' =WASPI campaign themselves. Are you saying it's only 1m women not 3.6m women? Or are you saying train drivers was 1bn not 136m?

Assuming you mean WASPI women, 1b = 1000m. As compared to 50m or 136m. It's the same point.

If you mean the train drivers - really? How is that calculated?

Haven't read the thread but I completely agree OP.

I lie, I read the first line of the first comment and it sums up everything that's wrong with this country today:

> No. It's the wrong decision. It should have nothing to do with " can't afford it"-

It has everything to do with "can't afford it"! We're running a deficit, there is no money, and this will do nothing to help growth so isn't even an investment for the long term!

Don’t get me wrong I’d be gutted if I thought I could retire at 60 then had to wait another 5 years

but realistically they were just made the same as everyone else don’t see what’s unfair about that

That 90% knew and had time to prepare.

why on earth should they get the best part of 10 billion?????

Yes the Tories wasted 100s of billions, which is why we have no more money, it may be a small proportion of the monies they wasted but now there is no more more.

Debt to GDP when the Tories took over was 65%, with borrowing costs at 1.8%, its now 100% and borrowing costs at 4.2%

The Tories never governed, too busy infighting and Brexit.

That is the problem ultimately. If the 10% could be identified it might be different but from a cost /benefit perspective to have to give to 100% to compensate 10% it just isn’t a good use of government money.

Compensation for fucking up is never a good use of money but it has to be done. As someone who never expected to see any compensation I can’t get exercised over this but I’m in the happy position of not needing it. Let’s hope the postmasters and infected blood victims don’t get equally let down because the cost/benefit equation is negative.

A huge chunk did know that’s the issue …they can’t blanket payout to all….

Knowing isn’t the issue although somehow that’s how it’s being presented. The real issue is the lack of notice many women got that their pension would be delayed for several years.

How can it be an example of agism by the current government when it was the tories thar raised the pension age? Scratches head

Personally I don’t think it is any way right to conflate the blood scandal/postmasters with the WASPi cause. They absolutely do deserve full compensation.

I have now asked my mum, and a few of my neighbours around her age. All born 1950s. Every single person knew. Every single person had small children in the early 90s and they all had prepared accordingly. I checked and one of them was definitely a stay at home mum at the time. My mum was working full time so that wasn’t a factor . They all say at the time it was widely discussed because it was such a large change. I still struggle to understand how it passed some people by when so many people have said it was a big deal at the time. And certainly I can clearly remember the most recently change being on the TV. I wonder if maybe the ads weren’t run in some parts of the country?

The ombudsman didn't rule they should be compensated for lack of notice though did they? What evidence is there that the lack of notice in itself caused a financial loss?

🙄 Comprehension not strong with you eh? For the slow ones at the back - it's not about raising pension age, it's the manner in which it was done which has already been acknowledged as not optimal, then going against advice despite having shown support for it in opposition. No Parties come out of it well.

It’s pretty obvious that a delay in receiving a pension will result in financial loss, surely?

Personally I don’t think it is any way right to conflate the blood scandal/postmasters with the WASPi cause. They absolutely do deserve full compensation.

I agree, they absolutely do deserve it. I wasn’t conflating them but if a government can ignore an Ombudsman on one compensation claim, they could quite easily decide to do it with another.

Yes but everyone is in the same boat? We all are getting it late so all suffering a loss than what we otherwise would have had.

I meant how did the delay in notice about getting your pension later cause financial loss? Obviously receiving the pension later will mean less money but why do you think you should be compensated for that by younger people who will receive their pension even later.