New WASPI online map shows position of every MP on State Pension age change compensation
A new interactive tool launched by the Women Against State Pension Inequality (WASPI) campaign shows the UK-wide state of play of MP support for a compensation scheme for millions of women affected by changes to their retirement age.
The new analysis shows 179 MPs have publicly blasted the UK Government's decision not to compensate WASPI women in recent months. WASPI said that of these, 56 Labour MPs have openly criticised Downing Street's failure to deliver justice, while dozens more are thought to be supportive behind the scenes, including several senior ministers.
The map shows how smaller parties are almost unanimous in their support, with a strong coalition of Liberal Democrat, Reform UK, SNP, Green, Plaid Cymru and DUP MPs backing calls to compensate WASPI women.
The smaller parties are almost unanimous in their support, with a strong coalition of Liberal Democrat, Reform UK, SNP, Green, Plaid Cymru and DUP MPs backing calls to compensate WASPI women.
Around a dozen Conservative MPs have also recently reaffirmed their support for compensation.
The findings come at the launch of WASPI's new website, which has new resources to enable supporters to write to their MP and join the campaign for as little as £15 per year.
Some of the strongest advocates for WASPI women include members of the State Pension Inequality for Women APPG, chaired by Labour MP Rebecca Long-Bailey.
The cross-party group of MPs is one of the largest in Parliament and includes representatives from across the major political parties who have vowed to continue the fight for justice.
However, WASPI campaigners say 134 MPs previously backed calls for compensation but have failed to reaffirm their support since the Labour Government's announcement in December.
The figures do not include serving government ministers or whips, at least 80 of whom have previously pledged their support for the campaign.
Angela Madden, Chair of Women Against State Pension Inequality (WASPI), said: 'The Government's refusal to compensate WASPI women, despite admitting wrongdoing, is a national scandal.
'We know hundreds of principled MPs are still resolute in their support for those affected and firmly disagree with the decision taken by the Labour leadership.
'While some appear to have given up on us, abandoning the vulnerable women they once promised to fight for, it is clear that a majority of MPs know deep down that compensating WASPI women is the right thing to do.'
With a High Court challenge into the UK Government's decision under consideration and a key vote on proposed disability benefit cuts due this month, it is thought more Labour MPs could soon speak out.
In December, Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall stunned MPs when she apologised for the failures made by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), but stopped short of announcing plans for a compensation scheme.
Campaigners say the failure of the Labour and Conservative leadership to back WASPI compensation has boosted support for the Liberal Democrats and Reform UK, as well as the Greens in urban areas, south of the border.
It is thought both Plaid Cymru and the SNP could benefit from their strong support for WASPI women at next year's elections in Cardiff and Holyrood.
All MPs' positions on compensation can be found on WASPI's interactive 'state of the nation' map, alongside new campaign resources, here.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
11 minutes ago
- The Independent
Narinder Kaur criticises BBC's decision to have Thomas Skinner on Strictly
TV star Narinder Kaur has criticised the BBC's decision to cast former The Apprentice candidate Thomas Skinner as a celebrity contestant on Strictly Come Dancing after saying she was told she was 'too controversial' for the show herself. It comes after Skinner met US vice president JD Vance for a barbecue and drinks, with the 34-year-old – who befriended US President Donald Trump's number two on social media platform X – describing the event as 'once in a lifetime'. In the caption of a video posted to X, Jeremy Vine panellist and former Big Brother star Kaur, 52, said: 'Apparently I was deemed too controversial for @bbcstrictly because they only hire quiet brown and black women that fit in a box. 'But you can be a white man AND be controversial and you'll be hired on the spot! Hello Thomas Skinner!!' In a statement, she added: 'There's only so much you can say in a short video, but I felt something many others have been feeling all day and that was complete shock and utter bewilderment – to see Thomas be announced in the line-up, considering all the rhetoric about how people with right-wing opinions are cancelled and not allowed on the BBC. 'I've debated Tom on Good Morning Britain before, I supported his book release at his launch party, there is a huge disparity in what certain demographics of people are allowed to say and still get one show after another. 'I met the Strictly team at the TV Choice Awards earlier this year and got talking to one of the bookers about the show generally – and she said 'You're a bit too controversial and we can't have that for the show.'' Social media personality Skinner has been announced as one of the latest celebrities to be taking part in the upcoming series of BBC One show Strictly. He recently claimed he had received 'death threats' and 'vile comments about my children', following a series of social media posts claiming 'something's gone wrong' in the UK, and saying 'there is nothing wrong with being proud of where you're from'. In other posts, which drew criticism from some of his followers, Skinner said it is 'not far-right' to be 'flying your flag and loving your country', and he complained 'it ain't safe out there anymore' in London, saying the city is 'hostile' and 'tense'. Following the post complaining about alleged abuse, Mr Vance replied with a picture of a cartoon character typing on a keyboard and a message that read: 'Hang in there, my friend. Remember that 90 percent of people attacking your family look like this.' After the Strictly announcement, Skinner said in a social media post: 'They say don't read the comments on social media. But I couldn't help myself. I've had absolute pellets all day on my Instagram lost about going on Strictly… Why are some people so angry that don't even know me.' Among the other celebrity contestants confirmed for Strictly this year are former Geordie Shore star Vicky Pattison and Neighbours actor Stefan Dennis. They join the likes of podcast host and YouTube star George Clarke, RuPaul's Drag Race UK finalist La Voix, former England rugby player Chris Robshaw, and model and CBBC actress Ellie Goldstein, who is to become the first contestant with Down's syndrome to take part in Strictly's full series. The line-up is completed by Love Island winner Dani Dyer-Bowen, EastEnders actress Balvinder Sopal, Gladiators star Harry Aikines-Aryeetey, Doctor Who actress Alex Kingston, and former footballer Jimmy Floyd Hasselbaink. Strictly, hosted by Claudia Winkleman and Tess Daly, will return to BBC One and BBC iPlayer in September, with Craig Revel Horwood, Motsi Mabuse, Anton Du Beke and Shirley Ballas as judges.
The Independent
11 minutes ago
- The Independent
Is Britain's sluggish economy the fault of the Labour government?
The latest economic growth numbers may have been fairly unimpressive by most historical standards, but they were rather better than recent readings and surpassed market expectations. The first estimate of the size of the UK economy showed it had expanded by 0.3 per cent in the second quarter of this year, against a rise of 0.7 per cent in the first three months. Investors had 'priced in' a minimal 0.1 per cent rise. The annual increase, ie on the same period last year, is 1.2 per cent. Is this good news or bad news? What's happening? The pattern of sluggish economic growth that has prevailed in Britain, and most of the West, since the global financial crisis of 2008, is proving to be the new normal. It's not what we had come to expect. For most of the postwar period, punctuated by stop-go cycles, average economic growth was running at 2 to 2.5 per cent a year, with some endemic inflation and structural unemployment. By the 1990s this had accelerated to something like 2.7 per cent, combined with lower inflation and unemployment. In recent years, excepting the pandemic, growth has been more like 1 to 2 per cent. This is driven by low investment and a poor productivity record, exacerbated by market loss post-Brexit. Is this what Labour promised? No. It gave the impression that the very act of electing a Labour government to replace the incompetent Conservatives would lift confidence and 'kickstart' the economy, but no firm evidence of that has emerged. Expectations have not been fulfilled. For example, the Labour manifesto stated: 'Sustained economic growth is the only route to improving the prosperity of our country and the living standards of working people. That is why it is Labour's first mission for government. It means being pro-business and pro-worker. We are the party of wealth creation.' Rachel Reeves, when she was shadow chancellor, promised 'securonomics', but little has since been heard about that either; tax rises and welfare cuts have been the main talking points. Will Labour's policies work? They may well do, but not necessarily fast enough to produce tangible results by the time of the next general election, and to rescue Labour's second term. There are many measures that should edge up growth, even if each is comparatively modest: the Brexit reset; trade deals with the US and India; making the public finances stable; reforming planning rules; expanding airports; building 1.5 million homes; green energy including nuclear power; loosening financial regulation; making room for cuts in interest rates; and some strategic investments in new sectors. Headwinds for the UK include the continuing world trade war, cuts in migration, a trend to higher debt-financing costs globally, and the prospect of more wars. The problem is that any major investment drive takes years, which means that much of the benefit in lifting the trend rate of economic growth won't be felt until the early to mid-2030s – by which time some other political party may be in power and claiming the credit. What can Labour do? Up its presentation. As with the NHS, voters need hard evidence that things are indeed improving, even if slowly, and that they are on the path to better times. That means explaining why present sacrifices have to be made, but also some vision of the rewards that will follow as a result. The party needs to boast and showcase its successes. Does it matter? The economy will always be central, which in a way is a strength for Labour given that it can't win on the 'culture war' issues. A display of determination and competence in running the public finances and the wider economy can win the confidence of the voters. Unfortunately, Reeves has made too many errors of political judgement to be confident that the public will be receptive to anything she says. But give it time, and some evidence of higher living standards and improved public services, and that can be turned around. Is the opposition capitalising on Labour's misfortunes? Not that much. The words 'Liz Truss' and 'mini-Budget' still make people – including the current shadow chancellor – wince. The memories of the Tory years in power aren't that rosy: a long spell of austerity, followed by Brexit, Partygate, splits, crises, and general 'chaos and confusion'. Labour can still rightly pin some of the blame for 'broken Britain' on 14 years of Tory rule. The electorate simply isn't yet ready to give the Tories a hearing; they've apologised for Truss, but it's not enough. Meanwhile, perhaps from frustration with the two main parties, voters are curiously susceptible to the lavish and unrealistic promises made by Nigel Farage and Reform UK. Again, this could actually turn to Labour's advantage if it concentrates on the not-too-difficult task of proving that Farage's fantastical figures don't add up. Not much sign of that yet, though. Labour's biggest problem isn't so much the economy as complacency.
The Guardian
12 minutes ago
- The Guardian
People held under UK's ‘one in, one out' asylum deal say they had not heard of it
Asylum seekers locked in detention centres as part of Labour's 'one in, one out' deal have said they had not heard of the scheme before arriving in the UK on small boats and were terrified of being returned to their home countries. The prime minister, Keir Starmer, has said the plan to send one small boat arrival back to France in exchange for accepting another to live in the UK would deter the thousands from crossing the Channel. Since the first group of small boat arrivals were detained just over a week ago on 6 August, 2,363 people have crossed the Channel. More than 50,000 have crossed since Labour came into power. 'I was so happy to survive the journey across the Channel and to reach land in the UK. Then the Home Office locked me up. I'm still in a state of shock,' said one man from Eritrea, speaking to the Guardian by phone from a detention centre. 'We did not understand what was happening to us when the Home Office moved us from Manston [the former military base in Kent] where we were processed, straight to this place which is like a jail. 'When we asked why they were bringing some who arrived on the same boat as me here but letting others go free, they did not answer us. They just said it was because we crossed the Channel illegally.' The man said that neither he nor anyone he knew in northern France knew anything about the 'one in, one out' deal and was not sure it would prevent people from continuing to try to cross the Channel. 'I am very frightened here. There are people who have committed crimes in the UK locked up with us. We have done nothing wrong apart from trying to find a safe place.' He claimed to have been trafficked and tortured when he passed through Libya on his journey from Eritrea. 'I believe if I am sent back to France and the smugglers find me they will kill me,' he said. A second man from Afghanistan also spoke to the Guardian from detention. He said: 'The Home Office have just locked us in these rooms and said we cannot go from here. We are frightened of the dangerous criminals locked up with us. We are so afraid of what Home Office will do to us. 'The Taliban tried to kill me so I escaped from Afghanistan. I thought I was free when I reached [the] UK but instead I am in this prison. We knew nothing about the 'one in, one out' deal when we left France. I don't know if it will stop people crossing the Channel.' The Home Office says the first group of detainees are expected to be returned to France within three weeks, with the UK referring potential returnees to the French authorities within three days of their detention and the French expected to respond within 14 days. A leaflet given to detainees by the Home Office says those returned to France may be offered a financial incentive by the French authorities to return to their home countries. It asks detainees to notify the Home Office if they are seriously ill or a victim of rape, torture or violence, although officials are supposed to screen for these vulnerabilities before detaining people. Karris Hamilton, an advocacy manager at Gatwick Detainees Welfare Group, which is supporting those earmarked for forced return to France, said: 'We are extremely concerned about the wellbeing of the men being detained for the 'one in, one out' scheme. 'Those we have spoken with so far are in acute distress and many have been victims of torture, exploited by traffickers on their journeys or victims of modern slavery in Libya. 'People are finding it difficult to eat and sleep due to being in a prison environment, not knowing how long they will be there and fearing that they may be taken back to France. We are very worried that we will see a rise in self-harm, suicide attempts and hunger strikes due to this.'
