Citywire for Financial Professionals
Stay connected:

View the article online at http://citywire.co.uk/money/article/a877452

Government rejects women's early pension access bid

The government has said it will not offer further transitional arrangements for 1950s women hit by state pension age rises.

 
Government rejects women's early pension access bid

The government has dismissed the idea of allowing Waspi women forced to wait longer for their state pension to access their pension credit early.

In another House of Commons debate on the issue, 10 MPs challenged under-secretary of state for work and pension Shailesh Vara over the hardship faced by women born in the 1950s.

The issue has been brought to light by the Waspi (Women Against State Pension Inequality) campaign, made up of women who have seen their pension age rise from 60 to 65 and then again from 65 to 66 in quick succession.

The first increase was passed in legislation in 1995 as part of the equalisation of men and women’s pension ages. The second increase happened in 2011 after the Conservatives and Liberal Democrat coalition linked the state retirement age with increased life expectancy.

In 2011, at the last minute the government made a £1.1 billion concession in the pension age rises to ensure no woman would have to wait more than an extra 18 months for their state pension, down from two years.

Labour MP and former shadow pensions minister Rachel Reeves said further concessions needed to be made to help the women who are struggling to bridge the gap between work and retirement.

‘Many of the women we are talking about are caring for elderly parents or young grandchildren. Many have been working since they were 15 years old and very few have significant pension savings,’ she said.

‘Will the minister give them some hope and look at transitional arrangements by allowing them to draw pension credit early to help them through this difficult time?’

Vara said the transitional arrangements had already been put in place in 2011 and ‘81% of women affected will have to work no more than 12 months [extra]’.

‘There is no plan for transitional arrangements,’ said Vara.

'Women deserve the facts'

Angela Rayner, current shadow pensions minister, said 2.6 million women were affected by the changes and called on the government to provide details of what transitional arrangements were considered in 2011.

‘The least [the women] deserve is the facts to allow an honest debate,’ she said.

‘We know the government considered £3 billion of transitional protections but only allocated £1 billion... in spirit of honest and open debate, will the minister release all details for transitional protection the government has considered?’

Vara said there were other benefits available to help older women including ‘jobseekers’ allowance, earnings and support allowance, carers’ allowance, personal independence payments, and pensions will be uprated; there is [the state pension] triple lock and a simplified state pension and pension freedom that allows those with pensions to have flexibility’.

He added that women would receive £8 per week extra under the single-rate state pension that would make it a ‘fairer’ system.

Vara also criticised Labour and the Scottish National Party for not addressing the Waspi cause in their own manifestos.

‘Not one party… put this measure in their manifesto because, just to [reverse the 2011 change] would cost over £30 billion and it would cost countless more to reverse the 1995 [measure],’ he said.

The government was also criticised over the way it communicated the changes to Waspi women, many of who say they did not receive any letters or communication from the Department for Work and Pensions.

Ian Blackford, Labour MP, asked Vara whether the government was going to apologise for the ‘utter shambles made of communicating the changes’.

Labour MP David Amis also brought up the issue of communication. He said he was ‘here in 1995 when [the changes] were announced’ and wanted to know ‘has the government taken appropriate action in communicating these changes to women’.

‘The initial changes were made in 1995 and until 2010, there were at least 10 Labour pension minsters...they made no effort in terms of communicating…as far as the Pension Act 2011 is concerned, over 5 million people were written to…to the address we had available at HM Revenue & Customs,’ said Vara.

50 comments so far. Why not have your say?

Michael Stevens

Feb 02, 2016 at 17:53

Very correct. Ladies have had it for too long. Retirement Age must increase to 70 by 2040

report this

geoffrey mulford

Feb 02, 2016 at 19:11

Good news for Ladies. The government have given you another 6 years to sort your retirement pension out.

( I think that 99% of women are sensible enough to see that equal retirement age to men is fair)

report this

mark antrobus

Feb 02, 2016 at 19:23

The question should be asked the other way round - what possible reason can there be for gender discrimination against men, who on average have a lower life expectancy than women, but who are forced via compulsory taxation to pay for women accessing a state benefit before they can? Remember the government has no money of its own - if women continue to get a preferential state benefit entitlement then it is men who are paying for it. This is a real injustice and the real question is why this was not stamped out in 1995, not why it should continue any longer.

report this

Hugh M

Feb 03, 2016 at 06:37

mark antrobus. Very well put and I agree with you 100%.

Women want equal rights, this is all part and parcel of equality with men.

Oh, I see, they only want equality in the areas that benefit them. Can't have it both ways ladies.

report this

Hazel Elms via mobile

Feb 03, 2016 at 12:37

This generation of women have NEVER had equal rights - different pay rates, pension availability etc. I know someone who had to resign from the police force in the early 70's because she got married and then had a baby. How equal is that????

report this

Jane Willis via mobile

Feb 03, 2016 at 13:00

Absolutely agree, pension age should be equalised. While 1995 was totally fair the timetable for 2011 was anything but. Got less than 8 yrs notice for an 18 month (originally) 2 yrs increase. How does this compare with future generations, public sector workers and even MPs, all promised a 10 year buffer! Doesn't feel very equal to me.

report this

Sharon Higgins via mobile

Feb 03, 2016 at 13:04

Women did not have equality in 1970. No maternity leave or equal pay. Many excluded from company pension schemes. 51 years NIC is a lot to "pay in". 1970 to 2021 (mine).

The 1970s were not easy times for women in the workplace.

"What possible reason could there have been for gender discrimination against women in '70s?" One reason was that Government policy assumed women were supported by a husband. I was told that I didn't need get same pay as my male colleagues because I was married and "working for pin money".

If you have an interest in this group of women and this particular issue the hashtag #WASPI on Twitter is an excellent source of information.

report this

Chris via mobile

Feb 03, 2016 at 13:06

WASPI ladies are not referring to the equality of 65 with men ! I was born in 1953 , I have worked from fifteen on low income , I have out of a small wage paid my National Insurace Stamp , believing that as stated for most of my hard working life , that my stamps paid would receive my state pension @ 60yrs, in 1995 legislation changed SPA, unknown by most in my age bracket ( apparently I heard in the debate on Monday that it was put in the FT!! . In 1995 I worked in a newsagents and the delivery of newspapers to professional people and working class , our supplier sent us TWO copies . As out of the hundreds of houses only perhaps an actuary would have it ! If you are a low earner , you do not have enough money to invest because if like myself , the bills are paid first ! I could not afford newspapers . The first I heard of the 1995 change was in 2008 , sheer chance being that my friend was going through a divorce and highlighted the matter ( at this stage the family law solicitor was unaware ) so three years prior to retirement have no time for financial planning , older, prospects less , also the majority have no private pensions . In 1995 I personally I was caring (unpaid) but for love for my father who had dementia and my mother who had chronic COPD and later Cancer until they died in addition I was a mother to two young children under ten . I also worked ! In 2008 I msde enquires and found out that indeed the SPA had risen to almost 63 in my case ( I am exhausted at this point) ok I will have to manage a couple more years, 2011 legislation changed again and my goal post changed again and I am almost 63 now no SP , but I am told I have to wait till I am almost 65 yrs . It is the transitional process that has been handled wrong , lack of communication , short financial notice , we have no safety net ! We worked all our lives paying that stamp when at times it could be more than you could afford for years but it was for the rainbow at sixty as we were always led to believe , it has Ben like a " rug being pulled under you " but not once but twice " I am still working , on a Saturday I start at one finish the shift at ten ! I pay my bills just but no holiday aboard , I do not smoke , I do not drink , I do not gamble , limited social as that costs money . The new state pension they talk about is if you fit into a certain criteria , ie enough Nat ins stamps . May I add a lot of pensioners have started from humble beginnings and I believe sincerely that I am not expecting nothing for which I believe when I paid that national Insurace stamp all my life that I was told I would reap . I was proud to be British , my father fought in the war , my grandfather also and all this leaves a bad taste . Also what is confusing too is the information given , in the 1995 change to get full state pension it had to be thirt eight years paid NI stamps , in 2011 the change was 30years national insurance stamp , apparently ( not sure) but believe 35 years now - confusing

report this

Mick Hudson

Feb 03, 2016 at 13:32

"Basically, what we are asking—and we feel this is a very fair ask—is for the Government to put all women in their 50s, born on or after 6 April 1951 and affected by the state pension age in exactly the same position they would have been in had they been born on or before 5 April 1950"

The demands of the WASPI group are completely disproportionate, and interestingly enough are not supported by Labour MPs despite their posturing.

It's disingenuous of politicians to publicly champion a cause without making it clear to that group and its supporters that they will only ever support a heavily watered down version of their demands.

The cost of the Triple Lock is estimated at around £6bn a year, and while it does make some difference to overall pension incomes, that money could surely be better spent being distributed to those in genuine need (men and women) over the age of 60.

report this

Lizzie Cornish

Feb 03, 2016 at 14:05

"Vara said the transitional arrangements had already been put in place in 2011 and ‘81% of women affected will have to work no more than 12 months [extra]’."

This is a LIE. This is based on the thinking that ALL women affected knew they'd be retiring at 65. We did NOT. We were NOT informed at all, not in any way, at all, that our group of women would be the ones to be thus affected, having SIX YEARS thrown upon us at the very END of our working lives!

On 22nd January 2016, I was told by the DWP, by one of the TeamLeaders in their Pensions Forecasting Dept, who rang me back, after having LOOKED INTO my questions, that NO LETTERS AT ALL were EVER sent out about the 1995 age increase, the DWP relying SOLELY on using publicity for this...They NEVER contacted women individually at all, until 2012, when most found out they'd have to be 66 (!!!) before getting their pensions!

ALL our lives long we've been told we'd retire at 60. We had NO reason to doubt this at all.

I found out PURELY by chance in 2009, when I contacted the DWP to find out info on my NI contributions, recently divorced, being a Carer for Nanny, my, by then, ex-mother-in-law, who at that time was aged 95.

They wrote back about this, telling me I had 40 years of NI..(now 44 so I was told in 2012)...and at the bottom of the letter was a small paragraph telling me my pension year would be 2020 (!!!)

I was expecting it to be 2015 (!!!!!!)

WHAT was I supposed to do? Come on, you men, TELL me, please? Thrown Nanny on to the streets? Get a REALLY HIGH PAID job, down here in Torquay having only had low paid, part-time jobs since my children arrived, me raising them, looking after my Darlin' Dad and then Nanny?

How was THAT going to happen?

I can't even find a really LOW paid job down here!

I'm no longer Nanny's Carer, now...and thus, find myself now thrust into Financial and Emotional HELL, because I'm staring at JSA for 6 months, with all the deep stress now involved with that, then being RETRAINED (?????) at 61, when NO-ONE will employ me!

I've sent of dozens of job applications so far, only ONE coming back to me, that of cleaner...and I even didn'tget THAT! Maybe he saw the arthritis in my fingers? I did my best to hide my hands at the interview...

This is NOT about EQUALITY, although this LIE is being used by Altmann and others to smear us. It is about the total LACK of 'gradually increasing'....because we've had SIX YEARS thrown upon us and we CANNOT COPE!!!!!!

Many of us on our own are in DESPAIR! We have nowhere to turn! We've had lives, thus I have animals, what am I supposed to do with them, if FORCED to take a job far from home???? I do not drive, never have, so I will be forced to take public transport, thus adding HOURS to my working day...(But I won'tGET a job due to being 61 !!!!)....

Same with being retrained??? I can't take my dogs there, so WHAT am I to do with them all day long?????

Do I have to put them down, to please Duncan Smith????????

As to the MISOGNYISTS this has brought out, can you guys truly understand this, please. FIRST of all, it was MEN who decided women should retire at 60 and you at 65. This was decided in 1940. It helped the families back then, for at least one member of the family was bringing money in, if the man found himself out of work...

That decision was NOT MADE BY WOMEN, so STOP blaming US for it!

Secondly, this 'you wanted equality, baby' stuff....WHY would you NOT want women to have equality? WHY would you want us to be UNEQUAL in everything?

They SHOULD have made the age for men and women 62.5, thus making it easier on men and far more reachable for women, it only being done in small stages for women even then.

AT PRESENT, men can clamin Pension Credit from the age of 63, as this is the age of retirement for current group of women to be retired under age of 65...WE, being women outside this age now, CANNOT claim this, as men can, despite those men being UNDER the STATE PENSION age.

This too is going though, so men will be left in same position as us, NO SAFTEY NET in their 60s any longer..and many men have claimed Pension Credit since being 60 when our age was still this...so they were helped HUGELY by this...

Nope, that's ALL going! So you too will be left in HELL, same as us!

Do I think this is right? NO! But, unlike you lot, I see the injustice..and NOT being a misandrist, I will speak up for you...ALL of us, men and women should be left with some kind of safety net in our pre-pension years, because for most of us, it is IMPOSSIBLE to find a job!

I've spoken up on behalf of men a LOT in these past 2 years, against the hateful Misandric Feminists who have launched a war upon you, so please, do NOT let me down by chucking Misogyny at this campaign!

It is about the fact that many of the 1950s women have had SIX YEARS thrust upon them, 5 years in ONE GIANT step, with ONE MOREadded for extra trauma...and we simply cannot cope!

You men couldn't cope with this either, at the end of your working lives, never having been informed.

Our generations should never have been involved in this, because we never had time to live our lives again, to make provision for these lost years...It's OUTRAGEOUS and it would be AS outrageous were it to have happened to MEN!

MANY Eastern European countries delayed these changes until 2040, because they knew, full well, the trauma and horror that would be caused by doing this too fast. Basically, they've removed and ensured that the 50s and 60s women are excluded from being The 65rs, now The 66rs, and that is absolutely right. You cannot bring an entire generation,or two, up to base their lives on retiring at 60, then telling them "Sorry, it's 66 now!" leaving them with NOTHING....

Many of us now have NO LiVES, we are just existing, not going out, can't afford to, becoming ill, under our GPs, cutting ourselves off from friends, depressed, suicidal...

You think this is OK? You think this is RIGHT? If so, you need to examine your souls!

This damned, sociopathic government is FULLY AWARE of the state so many of us are in! They have slammed the door upon us, don't want to know, couldn't give a damn!

We Carers have SAVED this country a £FORTUNE! £BILLIONS, all of us together! We've done ALL that we were supposed to do and now, we've been thrown into a sociopathic cess pit!

I now HATE my country, a country I once LOVED with all my heart....because it is led by disconnected, disassociated, dispassionate, uncaring, unfeeling, unempathetic sociopaths, who truly don't care if we live or die....

It was bad enough having to scrape by as a Carer, but we do that to care for our elderly...but to have this on top, and evenTHIS being made worse by the Misogynistic Bullying going on, plus the bullying from the Ministers themselves and their financial supporters, now busy smearing us into being greedy, selfish, vile women...well, it makes me just want to curl up in a ball and stay there...

I feel battered, brusied, kicked, punched..and...for the first time in my life, abused! And it is my own country that is doing this!

To all the GOOD Men and Women True who are supporting us, I thank them from the bottom of my heart...and there are even Tory MPs amongst them, speaking up for us...

To all those who are doing their damndest to hurt and wound us even deeper, shame on you all...truly, shame on you all!

My Darlin' Dad, like Nanny, was born in 1914..He went to war in 1939 for a better world...Thank god he's passed on, for had he lived to see his daughter being denied her pension, thrust into poverty and deep depression, becoming suicidal, all hope fading, he'd have wept many tears, of rage, anger and pain, for Dad was a gentle gentleman, a man of his word, who had great integrity and honour and he would no longer recognise his beloved country, feeling that The Nazis had won after all, despite all that he and his generation sacrificed.

I am truly beyond belief that we are being treated as we are...and nearly at the stage of beyond hope, for once I start to spiral into debt, and this WILL happen, I will exit stage left, no longer able to survive, to cope...

EVERY minister who has done this to us, every politician who has been complicit..and every cowardly 'anonymous' internet poster who posts such terrible things about us will have our names engraved on their souls one day for what you are all doing.

You many never have to answer to me, but trust me, one day, all of you will have to answer for how you have treated a whole generation of women....

I mourn the loss of the integrity, heart and soul of my country.

report this

Lizzie Cornish

Feb 03, 2016 at 14:13

Oh..and one last thing, on Monday, Altmann stated on TV that ALL of us HAD been informed by letter of the 1995 changes (this is a LIE!) and had either chosen to ignore it, or had just thrown it away before reading it, not understanding it. How INSULTING can she get! How much LOWER can she stoop!

TODAY I rang the DWP yet again, spoke the same department as I did on 22nd January, the one which categorically told me that NO LETTERS had EVER been sent out at all re. 1995 changes, only publicity being relied upon..and was told a TOTALLY different story!

TODAY's story is that we were ALL told by letter. (!!!!!)

I have asked for a COPY of this letter. I was told my request would be sent higher up and I'd be contacted by the department shortly. I also asked if Altmann had issued an edict telling the DWP that THIS is what they must now tell everyone. The young woman I spoke to sounded very uncomfortable about all of this, almost as if she were 'squirming' at having to say it.

A FULL investigation should be carried out (by whom, though?) to find out the TRUTH and to find out if DWP staff are now being pressured into lying. If they are, the person/s who are doing this should be ousted immediately..and that includes ALL Ministers associated with the DWP, from Duncan Smith downwards, along with Cameron and Osborne too...

Oh..and just the other week, Cameron said he'd be using money from the Pension Fund to fund the demolition of council estates...look it up!

Odd, as I thought there was NO MONEY in the pension fund for pensioners....

Lizzie - A pensionless, Shafted TWICE OVER pensioner!

report this

ali smith

Feb 03, 2016 at 14:26

Lizzie Cornish start a dog sitting/walking business. That way you keep your animals and home.

report this

geoffrey mulford

Feb 03, 2016 at 15:35

I will be 67 before I get my state pension.We are all in the same boat.

I blame child tax credits working tax credits child benefits and housing benefits for putting to much strain on the welfare system.

report this

mark antrobus

Feb 03, 2016 at 23:12

What the Waspi supporters just do not get is that the State Pension is a state benefit, that is paid out of the current ongoing National Insurance contributions of the current working population. In no sense has there ever been a contract along the lines of an occupational scheme, of basically the contributions you pay in are invested to produce a defined income from a guaranteed age. What they also do not seem to understand is that because people are living longer, if the State Pension age did not increase with life expectancy ,which until recently has been the case, the bill - which remember is born by the working population - would just keep on rising. Already, the State Pension is the most expensive single state benefit, and welfare benefits for the retired as a whole account for about 60% or more and rising of the £220 billion welfare budget. And given that women actually live on average longer than men there cannot possibly be any justification for continued discrimination against men. Also, no one would say the government has to give several years notice of cuts to working age benefits such as housing benefit and there is no logical reason why the State Pension should be any different. I would assume that the majority of people would be free of child care responsibilities by 60 and would be in work - so you adjust by simply keep working. And if for any reason you were not in work there is the safety of JSA and other benefits.

report this

Hugh M

Feb 04, 2016 at 02:36

First, I am a widowed male already retired so am not directly affected by this change. However I knew of it years ago. A female friend of mine who has lived in Greece for many years also knew about it when it was first announced. If both of US knew all about it, how on earth can women living in UK claim to have NOT known about it. It WAS widely advertised and reported. Those who claim not to have known are plain liars in my opinion.

The actual injustice in the past has been the discrimination against MEN. Had I been born a woman I could have retired 5 years earlier.

I have saved for my retirement most of my working life, a little here, a little there. As a consequence I have several private pensions. There is no excuse for not planning ahead and just relying on the state to keep you.

The government has NO money, it has the taxes it takes from my pensions and formerly my salary to redistribute but it is NOT the governments money.

These whinging women seem to think that I and many others should pay more in taxes so they do not have to work for a living as I had to. Get real. No doubt my taxes paid your child allowances and other family benefits in the past and you think the gravy train should continue to run and people paying taxes should continue to pay your fare. I've got news for you, there's no gravy left!

report this

Lizzie Cornish via mobile

Feb 04, 2016 at 15:40

Dear Hugh,

The 'injustice' was put upon you BY men, NOT women, back in 1940, see my link above. It was done to HELP men. Please, STOP blaming women for this.

You CANNOT increase someone's retirement age by 6/7/8 years within their lifetime, halfway through their working lifetime, especially not women, as we are the Mothers, staying home to raise our children, to care for elderly relatives, (this includes the MAN's RELATIVES, very often too)

To then not even BOTHER to individually notify the very women who would be so horrendously affected, is beyond belief. The early 50s women were given 12/18 months longer. Many of us, from some point in 1953 onwards (I'm April 1955) had the full, vast FIVE YEARS added to our age, NOT being informed in any way AT ALL about this until just a few years, months in some cases, still nothing in others, before we were due to retire...when they told many of us, in 2012, that we'd be 66 (!!) before we could retire, thus adding ANOTHER YEAR to an already absolutely unbearable burden.

I'm so sorry that you are filled with such anger and bitterness about this, such a total lack of compassion and empathy.

Please, rest assured, that if this outrageous, brutal and cruel injustice had been done to men, forcing them to work another 6/7/8 years at the end of their already 65 years, I'd have been fighting for you, as would many, many women.

This is NOT about equality at all, which most of us agree with, it's about the total LACK of 'gradually increasing' that has taken place, alongside a total LACK of being informed. We could NEVER have sorted this out anyway, for many of us women are on low pay, fitting our jobs around our families, young and old, and being Carers is a job in itself, for which we are paid £62.10 a WEEK, plus around £40.00 Income Support...being penalized instantly if we earn a penny over our allotted amount..many Carers never being able to do extra work, due to the Caring they have to do 24/7, saving this country a fecking £FORTUNE along the way, as their own lives disintergrate....

I would also fight for your children and grandchildren, if you have them, were they too having to endure the evil which has been put upon us.

I had a wonderful father, he was a brilliant, brilliant man, loving, kind, gentle, compassionate, wise, and I have missed him each and every single day of the 27 years he's been gone...

Dad would be broken hearted at what I'm now going through, truly gutted, as he would over all the other women in the same position as us. Many of us are single, t through divorce or just never having found a partner...

Shit happens in many lives, as it obviously has in yours too...

I hope that you and your beloved wife are reunited, in the not too distant future...

But, until then, please, stop taking this out on GOOD, INNOCENT women who have done NOTHING wrong here at all.

We are already lost, depressed, without hope, becoming ill...we truly don't need posts such as yours upon our shoulders.

Thank you

Lizzie

report this

Nigel Harris

Feb 06, 2016 at 10:02

Lizzie Cornish is simply an example of ther female imperative (a Red Pill term). Women will never be satisfied however much men sacrifice for them. Women are self-centred (gynocentric), have a sense of entitlement, and will continually make demands that men sacrifice them further. Women demand that men allow them entry to male space and will not allow us MGTOW.

report this

MoneyObserver

Feb 06, 2016 at 11:27

If any woman age 60+ plus living in the UK is destitute and not entitled to Job Seekers Allowance or other benefits, then I can see no reason why a little of the £1 billion per month we send out of the country on Overseas Aid should not be diverted to assist these cases.

Our own people should always come first.

report this

Hugh M

Feb 06, 2016 at 12:32

Money Observer There are far more deserving cases than these whinging women.

report this

MoneyObserver

Feb 06, 2016 at 12:47

Hugh M

I do believe that women are not being hard done by because of the equalisation of state pension age, and it is long overdue.

However if there are individual cases of hardship then we have a duty to our own citizens first, before we choose to spend taxpayers money on people for whom we have no responsibility other than that we choose to have.

report this

Maverick

Feb 06, 2016 at 14:30

And don't you turn off when people start putting WORDS IN CAPITALS and lots of exclamation marks in their posts?

report this

Dennis .

Feb 06, 2016 at 14:36

@ Lizzie Cornish - My wife was born after April 1950 and knew for years before about the fact that her pension would be delayed. In fact I remember discussing it in 2003 when I was made redundant and we fed it into our financial planning. How did she find out? Was she clairvoyant?

It was never a secret and most women of this age that I knew seemed to know about it.

report this

Lizzie Cornish

Feb 06, 2016 at 19:10

From Nigel: "Lizzie Cornish is simply an example of ther female imperative (a Red Pill term). Women will never be satisfied however much men sacrifice for them. Women are self-centred (gynocentric), have a sense of entitlement, and will continually make demands that men sacrifice them further. Women demand that men allow them entry to male space and will not allow us MGTOW."

Actually, Nigel, I'm one of the very few women who loudly stands up and shouts out on BEHALFof men, AGAINST the Misandric Feminists and The War Against Men & Boys. May I suggest you check people out first, before you throw your Misogynistic Rantings at them...and if you don't believe me, you can track back via my Twitter page (long way though, as at present the WASPI campaign is dominating)...and go to the photos on my FB page, read the one on International Men's Day.

I've lost more than a few female posters to my FB page, for my anti-extreme-feminist rantings....

So, may I politely suggest you place your words where the sun don't shine...and yes, I DO accept apologies!

Yes, we ARE suffering, hugely out here, many lives utterly blown apart by this SIX YEAR rise in our pension age in OUR lifetime.

This is NOT about equality, (although it should have been 62.5 for all men and women and never 65) it is about the total LACK of this being slowly, over a LONG period of time.

You CANNOT just whack on 6/7/8 years to someone's pension age at the ENDof their working lives, giving them NO notice at all, other than a year or two beforehand!

We should have had it like the Eastern European states have, where this is not being started until 2040, thus ensuring that all the women who have lived their lives being promised their pension age would be 60 would GET their pensions at 60..and those raised to expect 65 START their working lives with this age in mind...although this too has now risen to 66 for all of us, which is iniquitous.

NONE of us should be working to 66, not even to 65. Our bodies age, whether we like it or not..and no-one wants to give you a job when you're in your 60s...We women know that, because we can't get them.

At present, men have a safety net, getting Pension Credit, which once they were able to claim from 60 (when our pension age was 60), up to them being 65. Now it's 63, still linked to the women's pension age. Soon, it will be linked ONLY to their pension age, this being 66, obviously, so they too will be desperate, just as we are.

There is a MOUNTAIN of money and they're using the pension fund for all sorts of other things, whilst also brainwashing the people into seeing the pension as a benefit and one we should be grateful for, and that it won't even be there at all soon...

Tell me, if it's a benefit, why do MILLIONAIRES get the State Pension? The NHS too? Both these things are an ENTITLEMENT for ALL of us, rich or poor...They are NOT means tested they are simply a promise made by government, that if we pay in for a certain length of time, we will get xy and z back at the date we have always been told.

Now, Total Shihsters R Us have broken this apart, telling us that they have the right to delay, decrease, increase, cancel entirely, as they see fit, without EVER asking, nor informing The People, whilst STILL taking NI off them at the same level, or higher, whilst giving them NOTHING in return.

They are not giving us our pensions for 6/7/8 years, despite many of us having paid in over 40YEARS of NI - 44 years for me!

Sorry, I don't do Shihster R Us, nor Hypocrites R Us, nor Murderers R Us either..and they WILL cause MANY deaths from what they are doing, but they don't give a DAMN, because they are not emotionally connected in any way, shape or form.

I won't go quietly, and neither will many of the other women who have been so abused in this shocking way, their lives absolutely torn apart, leaving them stressed, desolate and in despair.

This should NEVER have been done to us, nor to any man either, were it happening to you...It is inhuman and it is IMPOSSIBLE for most people, on low incomes to cope with.

This brutal, cruel, vile government should be brought down..and the sooner, the better.

And by the way, the reason I fight for men is because I was blessed to be raised by a bloody *wonderful* man, and I have such a son too...so I know very well that all men are NOT as the Misandrists want them to be painted, but...when some of you start throwing such rude and nasty comments around, you absolutely shame yourselves, not me...so please, stop it. This is NOT about equality, it is about having 6/7/8 YEARS loaded onto our shoulders at once..and DECENT men, many of whom are supporting us, can see this vile injustice instantly and are only too happy to step forward to help us in EVERY way they possibly can.

Please, take a leaf from their book, for WE would fight to help you, were you in this position.

Thank you

report this

Lizzie Cornish

Feb 06, 2016 at 19:13

Dennis, your wife was lucky, even more so if she knew that SHE would be the group to have 6/7/8 years loaded on her shoulders. HOW she knew I've no idea, for on 22/1/16 DWP themselves told me, categorically, that NO LETTERS at all were EVER sent out to ANY woman whatsoever, this ONLY taking place in 2012 and even those letters being stopped between April and Nov due to concerns over incorrect information.

report this

Nigel Harris

Feb 06, 2016 at 19:46

@Lizzie Cornish. I am not interested in your solipsism.

report this

Dennis .

Feb 06, 2016 at 20:01

@ Lizzie Cornish I don't know if my wife ever received a letter, we just regarded it as common knowledge. It has been referred to on the News and in the papers often enough since 1995. Where have you been?

report this

Nigel Harris

Feb 06, 2016 at 20:16

You may all answer Cornish's questions but she will just arrive with more irrelevant questions and require more of your time and effort.

Ignorance has never been an excuse before.

mark antrobus stated an incredibly generous view, as is wont of men attempting to appease the unappeasable (i.e. women).

"The question should be asked the other way round - what possible reason can there be for gender discrimination against men, who on average have a lower life expectancy than women, but who are forced via compulsory taxation to pay for women accessing a state benefit before they can? Remember the government has no money of its own - if women continue to get a preferential state benefit entitlement then it is men who are paying for it. This is a real injustice and the real question is why this was not stamped out in 1995, not why it should continue any longer."

I think women should be made to pay men. The entire system is a wealth transfer from men to women in more than many ways.

Women have more registered votes than men, and women group together in order to force governments to bend to their will. Hence governments pass laws for "women this", "women that", and "women everything else". Women are often using the media to call men "losers" because they are now better "educated" than men, and outearn men, yet still require men to pay for women.

It is about setting boundaries. Men are not God, we cannot work to infinity. Even that would not suffice the female imperative.

report this

Anonymous 1 needed this 'off the record'

Feb 06, 2016 at 20:24

I wonder what she is like? Sounds pretty aggressive to me.

report this

dd

Feb 06, 2016 at 22:03

I don't think there would have been so much anger if the changes had been phased in competently.

The age group immediately before the Waspis should have had at least some extension to their State Retirement Age but they had no extension whatsoever - Why on earth not? Political tactics I suspect: No-one wanted to address the issue close to elections. It was left until the last minute and landed onto one group. By including the earlier group, * even more * savings would have been made, to spend on whatever the government regards as its priorities!

It is not as if there was insufficient time (from 1995) to include the group immediately before the Waspis and spread the load.

The equalisation goal is fine but the implementation has been dreadful in my opinion.

report this

Maverick

Feb 06, 2016 at 22:29

The whole lot of you seem to have forgotten that in 1994 those in occupational schemes were forced to equalise pension ages overnight, as a result of the European Court's judgment in the Coloroll case. As almost all schemes equalised ages at 65, women in the schemes had to work another five years before becoming eligible to draw pension.

I don't remember an enormous protest from women in 1994. In fact I don't remember any protest at all.

report this

mark antrobus

Feb 06, 2016 at 22:29

Lizzie Cornish is an example of people with a real problem - people who believe that the world owes them a living. In the UK, life expectancy for someone who as already reached 60 is a further 24 years (http://www.helpage.org/global-agewatch/population-ageing-data/life-expectancy-at-60/ ). To say that it would be unreasonable for the 30 million people aged below 60 who are actually in work to support the 20 million or so over 60 would be a gross understatement; it would be crippling. Can anyone justify why my children in their 20s should have to pay for this largesse, when they have been incurred with massive university debts simply in order to gain the qualifications needed to access the same employment opportunities that my own parents did not even need A levels for, who are forced to pay rents ever higher as a % of earnings, and are only renting in the first place because home ownership costs have spiralled out of control, and who, unlike Lizzie Cornish'e generation are increasingly unlikely to have access to a generous final salary pension scheme?

Remember that the government has no money of its own, only other people's. For someone to assert a 'right' to live for a full 24 years at the expense of their children's generation is insulting and non negotiable; either save while you are working or keep on working - and stop winging.

report this

dd

Feb 06, 2016 at 22:44

My comment was that *more* women should have been included in the extension, not fewer. That would have helped in a minor way to alleviate the problems of the country's debt and deficit or fund good causes (if it were really put to good use) as well as reduce the anger we hear.

I don't intend to stop working before 70 unless it is forced upon me and I regard myself as lucky to have the choice. I am not whinging.

report this

mark antrobus

Feb 06, 2016 at 22:55

DD - the winging comment was certainly not made with you in mind. And good luck to you working to whatever age you wish - in fact with very few exceptions employers can no longer arbitrarily sack employees in the name of retirement just because they happen to be of a certain age - so no one should be able to force you to stop before your wish.

report this

dd

Feb 06, 2016 at 23:02

Mark,

I agree and have also argued in other situations about demographics, the ageing population, the cost of care, the economy and the balance of trade (what balance?) etc but:

How do you know that the Waspis do not also have children in their 20s whom they would love to be able to assist? I know that some have teenagers and are just as concerned as you are about university costs.

How do you know that the Waspis have access to final salary pensions? Some in that age group may have but not all by any means. I lost mine when my employer was bought by another. No protections in those days.

The generation with the final salary pensions are more likely to be that group which I suggested above should have had their SPA extended a little, at least. Generally speaking, they are the ones who have got off lightly, not the Waspis.

report this

dd

Feb 06, 2016 at 23:09

Mark,

Our comments crossed. Thank you for yours.

I think that there is very wide variety within the Waspi age group.

report this

dd

Feb 06, 2016 at 23:22

There is something else which could be done for those who are so badly affected. That is to change/adapt the JSA schemes which they are required to attend, where they are currently sent on courses which are totally inappropriate and demeaning and where they are sanctioned like school children. JSA courses could be replaced by courses with competent business mentors or enthusiastic specialist coaches. Now there is a business opportunity - but it won't be acceptable to the overseers of the JSA. That is what saddens me.

report this

Dennis .

Feb 07, 2016 at 09:17

Funny, there was a law passed some years ago about not using your mobile phone in a car whilst driving. I don't recall the government writing to me to tell me about it. Same about seat belt wearing and a few other things, does this mean I am exempt?

report this

Piston Broke

Feb 07, 2016 at 09:23

The change in spa for women has been changing year by year for 6 years now , why leave it till now to complain ? There was an election last year , who do you think put the Conservatives in power ...just the men's vote ?

Nearly 150,000 have signed the petition , very impressive and well done . But there are over 60 million people in the UK , sure only half might turn out to vote , so do you think your 150 k will make a difference ? Most of the women affected will be 65/66 by the time the next election comes around .

Sorry ladies you have had your debate what the petition earned you , I think it is all over bar the shouting .

report this

Lizzie Cornish

Feb 07, 2016 at 11:27

Mark Antrobus:

From You: "Lizzie Cornish is an example of people with a real problem - people who believe that the world owes them a living..."

From me: I have 44 YEARS of NI contributions, I have worked, raised my children, worked, cared for Dad until his death (3 years), cared for my ex-mother-in-law (born in 1914, as was my Darlin' Dad) for 15 years, until very, very recently when she left me only because she felt she had weeks/months to live, due to deteriorating and feeling she should be with her son. (He'd have put her in home after our marriage broke up..she lived with us then, felt Care Homes were like The Workhouse, was absolutely terrified, and so I took her with and my children. His new wife did *not* want to care for her. I took her in despite having only a small flat and we have lived all squashed up for the past 6 years, getting on in the spirit of The Blitz, really, just having to, because you look after your own..and you don't put people aged in their mid-90s into homes, nor throw them on the streets!

From you: "...In the UK, life expectancy for someone who as already reached 60 is a further 24 years (http://www.helpage.org/global-agewatch/population-ageing-data/life-expectancy-at-60/ )..."

From me: Really? Tell that to the stream of famous people who have died in December/January alone, most in their mid-60s. The age we are dying at is actually going down and has been for the past 4 years, but of course, the new mantra is "We are ALL living longer!" in the pensions industry and govt's efforts to brainwashed people into this. My Dad died in his early 70s. MANY of us die before EVER reaching our pension (of course, the money *saved* is NEVER mentioned), or shortly after we start to receive it, this too NEVER being mentioned. The spin is to convince all that we ALL live to be 80/90 and we ALL draw our pension throughout this time. Biggest load of crap ever...and ANY statistics can be falsified.

From you: "...To say that it would be unreasonable for the 30 million people aged below 60 who are actually in work to support the 20 million or so over 60 would be a gross understatement; it would be crippling...."

From me: Well, it's worked perfectly for a very, very long time and forcing OLD people into work (if they can even GET it, of course) means that the alleged 30 millions people below 60 will have fewer and fewer and fewer jobs and they need those jobs in order to be able to live their lives. Also, many pensioners are the backbone of the voluntary section, and if they're now having to work, or can't even afford the bus into town to help out, due to having had their pensions stolen, that will cause chaos for the voluntary sections of our country.

From you: "Can anyone justify why my children in their 20s should have to pay for this largesse, when they have been incurred with massive university debts simply in order to gain the qualifications needed to access the same employment opportunities that my own parents did not even need A levels for, who are forced to pay rents ever higher as a % of earnings, and are only renting in the first place because home ownership costs have spiralled out of control, and who, unlike Lizzie Cornish'e generation are increasingly unlikely to have access to a generous final salary pension scheme?"

From me: MY children are also in their 20s, my daughter is 29, my son is 21. I lost two inbetween them, was 40 when I had my son. My daughter could never afford to go to University and we could not afford to send her. So, after she came out of school, due to severe bullying, by other pupils and by some teachers and the entire crappy, insane, corporate system which stresses children to the point of suicide these days, she was home-educated, from 15 onwards. She chose to take NO exams at all, indeed, it took her 2 years to de-stress from school. She THEN chose to take an Open University degree in Art History, paying for it as she went along, working and studying, also being given a grant by the OU which helped her enourmously....She had always been able to get work, despite having NO EXAMS at all. She got her degree, she had no debt incurred for that degree.

She pays rent, an exorbitant amount for her tiny flat. I too fume about the way the world has gone, but young people pay NI in the same way we did...and the rest of how the world has become is NOT the fault of older people. Her generation is NOT the generation paying for the 1950s women's pensions.

My son too came out into home-education, far earlier than his sister. Indeed, had I known I could do this, I'd never have sent either of them into The System, but back then, home-ed was not so well known about as it is today. My son chose to go to college when he was 17. He gained the exams he was studying for, equivalent to 4 A levels. He was much appreciated by the teachers, because he is a kind, gentle, loving young man, who did all he could to help some of the deeply troubled youngsters, most of whom were only there to get the grant paid to encourage youngsters to stay in education. This has now been scrapped.

He has been working ever since.

NEITHER of my children thinks 'the world owes them a living' and indeed, being the children of a divorce, know full well how life can implode very fast and change, emotionally and financially, in the same way..

They do NOT have a problem paying NI and helped to care for Nanny....not resenting her for 'being alive' at 101 at all.

I have NEVER had 'access to a generous final pension scheme', nor even a non-generous one, as my life, in the main, was in jobs that offered no pension schemes at all (and these were not BIG NEWS back then, for life was VERY different, most of us relying on our husband's pension schemes) and then, I became a mother, then a Carer, whilst still caring for my children, due to the late age I had children, losing 2 along the way and the late age of both my father (Dad was 17 years younger than my mother) and my then in-laws, BOTH of whom, like my Dad, were born in 1914.

From you: "Remember that the government has no money of its own, only other people's. For someone to assert a 'right' to live for a full 24 years at the expense of their children's generation is insulting and non negotiable; either save while you are working or keep on working - and stop winging."

Exactly, that money is OURS, yours, mine, our children's, our grandchildren's....everyones. Thus, they have the absolute duty to ensure that it is spent ON the people, on our health service, education, our young AND our old. They do NOT have the right to use it for their insane vanity projects, such as HS2, a museum for Thatcher, endless invasions cosing endless £BILLIONS, etc.etc.etc....

VERY few of us live very long lives, like Nanny...and other than her pension, she has cost this country very little. I cared for her, thus I saved this country probably in the region of £350,000 over 15 years. She needed food to live, thus she contributed to people's jobs, she needed clothes, she needed her feet cared for by professionals (not given on NHS any longer), thus chiropodists benefitted...etc.etc.etc....

Old people DO give back to society, you know, not just 'leech' off it, as you try to make out...

As mentioned above, many of us won't even make it to our pensions, or only draw them for a few years, if that...I think MANY of the 1950s women, especially those on their own, won't make it..and thus, you can hold a party over all the £££££s that have been saved, whilst not stopping, for a moment, to think of the utter misery that good, decent people are ending their lives in, through absolutely NO fault of their own, because some dorks,like yourself, feel they should have had SIX YEARS added to their pension ages, 7/8 for many of the 60s women, also raised to believe they'd retire at 60 and not given warning until almost the end of their working lives.

I'm sorry for you, truly I am, that you are so angry, but don't be angry at ME, because I'm a bloody GOOD person and I've fought damned hard through my life to try and make the world a better place...I also tell as many young people as I can to NOT accept this constant rise in pension age, nor what they are being told the reasons behind it are.

Your children could have chosen NOT to go to Uni, could have done an Open Uni course and got grants for that, or just chosen to have gone into work, as my son chose to do, bypassing Uni entirely. I never went to Uni, never wanted to, but I took a 6 week course at Pitman's secretarial school and ended up working in Harley Street, in a fascinating and brilliant job. There are many roads to working and they do not all have to be through University, where a degree has now been so devalued anyway, because everyone has one...near enough, often in useless subjects, which they've only just about managed to crawl through on the lowest mark...

The entire education system is Corporate now, all and only about ££££s for those behind it.

YOU are part of that financial world and have helped to create the kind of ££££ driven world we now exist in, in your efforts to make Loadsa Money.

So, Physician Heal Thyself, before you DARE to come knocking at MY door!

I am asking for NOTHING other than that which is MINE to have, having paid into it ALL my life long, believing I'd get my state pension (ALL I have to live on) at 60 just as I had been led to believe my whole life long.

*I* am NOT The Crook here!

Also, if there is NO MONEY in the pension fund, then how come Osborne and Cameron are using it for other things, Cameron even admitting recently he'd be using some from there to bulldoze council estates?

YOUR go, but, BUT, before you come back 'at' me, please remember this, my Darlin' Dad was a BRILLIANT chess player, always, ALWAYS giving anyone he played against his Queen, right from the outset. This was not his ego, but his sense of fairness, for Dad knew that he did not need his Queen to win any game and wanted to give others a chance, for he realized his brain worked in a different way to many, when it came to strategic thinking, of working out what his opponent would do next....He never lost a game, not ever...

I am my Father's Daughter...

Have a nice day......

report this

Lizzie Cornish

Feb 07, 2016 at 11:37

From dd: "There is something else which could be done for those who are so badly affected. That is to change/adapt the JSA schemes which they are required to attend, where they are currently sent on courses which are totally inappropriate and demeaning and where they are sanctioned like school children. JSA courses could be replaced by courses with competent business mentors or enthusiastic specialist coaches. Now there is a business opportunity -..."

We are NOT a 'business opportunity'. We are women who have had our pensions TAKEN from us for six years, being left in HELL! We are NOT wanting JSA (which is far, FAR lower than our pension!) nor do we expect to have sign on and be treated with the indignity of being 'retrained'....

Retrained....for WHAT? I will be 61 in April. NO-ONE will employ me! We CANNOT find jobs! We are already trained, intelligent women, we do NOT NEED to be 'RETRAINED' like Pavlov's Dogs!

We should NEVER have been brought into this fiasco and it should NEVER have even been started up until 2040, just as many Eastern European states are doing, because that way, those PROMISED their pensions at 60, who had lived their entire lives BELIEVING this and who could NEVER have made up for these SIX/SEVEN/EIGHT YEARS now loaded upon us, would have been pensioners, or long gone, none of this horror EVER having happened to us..and ONLY those who had been raised to see their pension age as 65 (although they've now been shafted too, it being 66 at present) able to cope because they'd have STARTED their working life KNOWING that 65 would be the end of it and thus could have hopefully been able to cope with this...

This constant rise in pension age now is wholly wrong, absolutely, in every way...

MPs had VAST salary increases on TOP of already VAST salaries to enable them to have £compensation for their pension age rise...yet we have been thrown into HELL, not even given warning of this, until it was way, WAY too late....it always would have been too late for us anyway, because most are on low incomes, being mothers and Carers, not 'career women' with private pensions schemes!

We could NOT change our lives! I had a one year old son in 1995 and an 8 year old daughter..and already very elderly in-laws looming...I'd already looked after my Dad for 3 year to his death, he dying when my daughter was 3 years old in his 70s...We could NEVER have changed our lives..and it's madness and total insanity to EVER expect we could have!

report this

Lizzie Cornish

Feb 07, 2016 at 11:48

From Dennis: "Funny, there was a law passed some years ago about not using your mobile phone in a car whilst driving. I don't recall the government writing to me to tell me about it. Same about seat belt wearing and a few other things, does this mean I am exempt?"

No idea. What is does mean is that if you are caught doing so, you will get a fine/points on your licence, I assume. I don't drive, so I'm not aware of this.

You will not lose your pension for SIX YEARS though, nor will you be thrown into financial hell, unable to find a job and forced into penury, because no-one told you a thing, other than the merest of publicity in odd places, it seems, even this NEVER telling women which side of 'the line' they be, whether they'd be getting a few extra months, or SIX/SEVEN/EIGHT BLOODY YEARS.

They DID produce a few leaflets, but they put these into Job Centres...you know, the very place we all go to to find out about our pensions, NOT. They EVEN produced a letter saying how difficult it was to locate these leaflets...but legally they 'put them out there' (whilst also ensuring they'd never be seen by those who needed to see them)...Clever, ain't it....and now, they screech "WE TOLD YOU ALL!" when of course, they never, ever did...

Thus is The Pensions Industry, from State To Private, crooked, all the way through....uncaring, unfeeling, only about fleecing as many innocent people as they can, whilst taking their money....

WHAT a filthy reputation you've now all got......and instead of owning up, apologizing, you bully and belittle the very people who are the 'victims' of this unbelievable brutal cruelty, which is literally destroying so many innocent women's lives.

report this

Michael Stevens

Feb 07, 2016 at 12:51

!985 Pension Act stated there would be increase of State Pension Age.

The E.U. said that the women's age must be increased to the man's before this can be increased.

Ladies have had plenty of information about the increase to 65 in 2018 and then 66 in 2020. Ladies will have an extra year to plan their retirement!

The age must be increased by one year every five, so 70 is obtained by 2040

report this

Lizzie Cornish

Feb 07, 2016 at 13:24

Michael, it was 1995. NO woman was EVER informed of this individually, by letter. That was verified to me by The DWP themselves, on 22/1/16. NO LETTERS concerning this were EVER sent out, they only relying on some publicity. ONLY in 2012 did they start to send out official letters and these contained the information stating that new pension age was now 66.

We have had NO INFORMATION sent to us by The DWP whatsoever, nothing that was ever initiated by them. A few of us found out after asking about NI contributions,or other things, and then they replied to us by letter, stating in a 'by the way' way at the end of these letters that our pension date was 2020. I was expecting 2015.

I was divorced, already a Carer, Nanny, my ex-mother-in-law, then 95.

Please, do feel free to explain to me HOW I was supposed to gather the money together to see me through SIX UNEXPECTED YEARS.

Please, I'm ALL ears...and also bear in mind, I was already on a very, very low income, being a carer...could not save a penny, only just about able to pay my bills etc...and that most women in the same position would only ever be on minimum wage, no-contract jobs...

I'm ALL ears...can't WAIT to hear.....

As the wonderful Mhairi Black, MP, said, we have been shafted twice over!

Mhairi, the youngest MP for centuries...who has NO PROBLEM paying her NI for those who have gone before her, and unlike Mark, above, is not only WILLINGLY doing this (as we have done too, 44 years, in my case) but she is FIGHTING for we 1950s women, DESPERATE to help us, seeing immediately the shocking injustice done to us, knowing the hell many of us are in...

Anyway, do fire away with your ideas.......

report this

Piston Broke

Feb 07, 2016 at 13:50

The change in spa for women has been changing year by year for 6 years now , why leave it till now to complain ? There was an election last year , who do you think put the Conservatives in power ...just the men's vote ?

Nearly 150,000 have signed the petition , very impressive and well done . But there are over 60 million people in the UK , sure only half might turn out to vote , so do you think your 150 k will make a difference ? Most of the women affected will be 65/66 by the time the next election comes around .

Sorry ladies you have had your debate what the petition earned you , I think it is all over bar the shouting .

report this

Dennis .

Feb 07, 2016 at 14:09

Lizzie, no one is questioning your case or endless writings on the matter. The fundamental problem is that how come lots of people knew about this from 1995 and you didn't?

Incidentally I spoke to my brother this morning and he and hiw wife, have been aware of it for years.

report this

mark antrobus

Feb 07, 2016 at 21:06

If Lizzie Cornish is the typical Waspi women I am actually beginning to feel sorry for our MPs - having to listen to endless winging and a complete refusal to accept reality.

So for the benefit of all these WASPI women let me break it down for you in three simple steps:

1. Women outlive men, so there is no possible reason why just because you are a woman you should be able to claim a state benefit several years earlier. In fact the real injustice is why have men been discriminated against for so long and since at least the 1995 Act, when this should have been speedily sorted.

2. Contrary to the hysterical claims of the above people ARE living longer into retirement - if you see my comment above the statement is evidence based with the source quoted, and there are plenty of other sources. Any money used to pay state benefits to the 20 million or so over 60 can only come from the 30 million or so aged below 60 in work, and with with this age dependency ratio considerably deteriorated in recent decades and set to deteriorate further it must be obvious that the equalisation of retirement ages has to be by rounding up, not down.

3. The government does not have to give years upon years of notice to amend state benefits - even though in this case it has done so as we all knew about this many years ago. If the government can make substantial reductions to working people's housing and council tax benefits and family tax credits they can do so to the state pension. I cannot possibly see what is unfair about someone in their early 60s who is statistically likely to live another 24 years working a few more years. In any event remember that the state pension is a state benefit and no government has ever given a contract with anyone that states their benefit would be paid from a certain date or for any particular amount - and quite sensibly because like all state benefits it can only be paid out of the taxes and National Insurance contributions of the current workforce.

report this

mark antrobus

Feb 07, 2016 at 21:19

P.S. A question to any WASPI women - if the basis of your case is that you never received a personally addressed letter stating that your first eligible date for claiming the state pension was going to be 65 or whatever age you claim to be unfair - did you ever receive a personally addressed letter at any time in the past that stated, without any clause that all legislation is subject to change, that you would definitely receive a state pension from a specific date for a specific amount? A yes or no answer would suit fine.

report this

ali smith

Feb 07, 2016 at 21:34

Lizzie Cornish you really do seem angry. Your life choices led you to where you are and 60 really isn't old. 80+ is !

As for Unit being a waste of time, degrees devalued, don't say that to my kids who worked damned hard to get theirs and are now paying back the loans.

They now have good careers, work ethic and because of the way things are probably won't even get a state pension..... after paying in for 40+ years towards others

Your glass is half empty, mine half full..

report this

Hugh M

Feb 08, 2016 at 01:26

Stop the whinging Lizzie and take note of the comments of others. You have absolutely no support here.

report this

Steve Lewis

Feb 08, 2016 at 18:32

An article from the Independent in the year 1993 ...yes 23 years ago .

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/pension-age-for-women-will-rise-to-65-1507210.html

report this

leave a comment

Please sign in here or register here to comment. It is free to register and only takes a minute or two.

News sponsored by:

Sponsored Video: The sterling slump: what’s next?


After Boris announced he was backing Brexit, sterling suffered its biggest slump in six years. Our Market Mavens discuss. Follow the Market Mavens LinkedIn page for weekly videos, in which our panel of industry experts share their views on financial news

Today's articles

Tools from Citywire Money

From the Forums

+ Start a new discussion

Weekly email from The Lolly

Get simple, easy ways to make more from your money. Just enter your email address below

An error occured while subscribing your email. Please try again later.

Thank you for registering for your weekly newsletter from The Lolly.

Keep an eye out for us in your inbox, and please add noreply@emails.citywire.co.uk to your safe senders list so we don't get junked.

Sorry, this link is not
quite ready yet