MPs fear 'repeat of WASPI scandal' as many state pensioners don't know key rule
MPs have raised concerns that there could be a repeat of the WASPI scandal as many people do not know about an important restriction on the state pension increase. The WASPI (Women Against State Pension Inequality) dispute revolves around the increase in the state pension age from 60 to 65 and then 66 for women born in the 1950s.
The campaigners claim they were not properly informed of the change by the DWP, with many unaware they would have to wait several more years to claim their state pension, ruining their retirement plans.
They are currently continuing their fight for compensation, despite the Government saying at the end of last year that there would be no payouts. WASPI has applied to the high court for a judicial review of the Government's decision.
Now MPs have raised concerns that many state pensioners are unaware of another important rule that could affect their payments.
A debate was held in Westminster Hall about changing the 'frozen state pension' policy, as over 400,000 state pensioners living abroad in certain countries do not get the triple lock increase.
For your payments to go up each April, you need to live in the UK or in a country that has a social security agreement with the UK, while people on countries like Canada and New Zealand do not get a rates increase, with their payments frozen at the level at which they were when they moved to the relevant country.
Speaking during the debate, Liberal Democrat MP Rachel Gilmour called attention to the importance of state pensioners knowing how the system works.
She said: 'People who receive a pension income have worked throughout their careers for that money, and they deserve to be able to access it fairly and with the proper information, lest we see a repeat of the WASPI scandal.'
Conservative MP Gregory Stafford presented the debate in Parliament, and he also called attention to the plight of the WASPI women.
He said: 'Only this year, we saw continued poor treatment through policies such as the removal of the Winter Fuel Payment and the betrayal of the WASPI women, both causes that were vociferously supported by the Labour Party in opposition. Labour is happy to freeze pensioners and happy to freeze their pensions.'
DUP MP Jim Shannon also drew a connection between the general lack of knowledge of the frozen pension policy and the WASPI dispute.
He warned: 'The widespread lack of transparency is reminiscent of the lack of transparency with WASPI women. The all-party parliamentary group on frozen British pensions has reported that nearly 90% of all affected pensioners were unaware of the policy before moving.'
Conservative MP Rebecca Smith also urged the Government to make sure people know about the rules and mentioned the WASPI issue.
She said: 'The Government need to make sure they properly communicate pension terms to people well ahead of the time they expect receive a state pension. We have seen in the WASPI women campaign the issues that can be caused, and I believe that no one wants to replicate that.'
Pensions minister Torsten Bell stood up to provide a Government response to the debate, and to explain the thinking behind its current policy.
He said there would be large costs involved in uprating state pension rates for all those living abroad, adding that this would involve tax rises to pay for.
He explained: 'The UK Government's position under all parties is that we are not in the business of new reciprocal arrangements, with any countries.
'The only recent agreements have been the rolled-over agreements with the EU and the EEA, agreed by the previous Conservative Government, but that was to maintain the existing social security arrangements.'
The minister also referred to the WASPI campaign in his response: 'I gently note—very gently, so that I get out of this room safely—that many of the people calling for pensions to be uprated are also calling for reverses to the Winter Fuel Payment policy and compensation for WASPI women, but are not calling for less investment in the NHS or higher taxes.
'In the current financial climate, there are real choices, and there have been no suggestions in this debate about how any of these policies would be funded.'
READ SOURCE
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
11 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Police probe ground, abandon buildings in search for Madeleine McCann
June 4 (UPI) -- German and Portuguese police Wednesday continued their search near the Praia da Luz resort in Portugal for Madeline McCann, the British child missing since 2007. The search efforts included using ground penetrating radar focused on some derelict structures a few miles from the site where Madeline went missing. German federal police requested the renewed search that began Tuesday as they seek evidence against the imprisoned prime suspect, Christian Bruckner. He is serving time for raping a 72-year-old woman near Praia da Luz in 2005. The search is scheduled to continue until Friday. Bruckner lived in one of the houses being searched when Madeline went missing. Roughly 30 officers are conducting the search using drones and a digger and well as the ground penetrating radar. The radar employs electromagnetic radiation pulsed into the ground to detect objects or changes beneath the surface, reducing the need to dig as much as other wise would be required. Bruckner has denied being involved in Madeleine's disappearance. He was officially identified as a suspect in 2022. The search is focused on 120 acres that include abandoned buildings between the Ocean Club resort where McCann and her family were staying and the house Bruckner lived in. Bruckner sometimes worked as a handyman at the Ocean Club. Madeleine disappeared May 3, 2007 after her parents left her sleeping in a room with her twin 2-year-old siblings. The last search before this was in 2023 near the Barragem do Arade reservoir roughly 30 miles from Praia da Luz. Bruckner is set to be released from prison in September unless further charges are filed.
Yahoo
11 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Britain's Prince Harry explored changing surname to Spencer, says Guardian report
LONDON (Reuters) -Britain's Prince Harry and his wife Meghan explored the idea of changing their family name to Spencer amid months of delays in their two children receiving British passports, the Guardian newspaper reported on Wednesday. Harry, the Duke of Sussex, believed that the passport delays were the result of British officials blocking the applications over the use of the Sussex surname and HRH titles (his or her royal highness) for his children, the newspaper said, citing an unnamed source. A source with knowledge of the matter told Reuters that the prince had a meeting with his late mother Diana's brother, Charles Spencer, to discuss the family name. The source also said other media reports which said Spencer had advised Harry against changing his surname and that the legal hurdles to doing so were insurmountable, were inaccurate. Harry, the younger son of King Charles, stepped down from royal duties in 2020 and moved to California, where he lives with Meghan and their two children, Archie and Lilibet. Since leaving, he and Meghan have been highly critical of the royals in TV documentaries, an explosive interview with U.S. chat show host Oprah Winfrey and most notably in Harry's best-selling biography "Spare." The prince is barely on speaking terms with either his father or his elder brother, heir to the throne Prince William. In a BBC interview last month, Harry said he wanted reconciliation with the British royal family, but that his father King Charles will not speak to him over a separate row about his security.
Yahoo
11 minutes ago
- Yahoo
On the brink: Why slashing spending on global health will make us all sicker
This week, the Chancellor received a letter from those who know the NHS inside out with a plea to think again about international aid. It was signed by Presidents of diaspora health associations from across the UK, representing thousands of overseas-born healthcare workers serving in our NHS. Their message was clear: if the UK retreats further from its global health commitments, we all lose. These are not lobbyists or idealists. They're doctors, nurses and specialists on the front line of British healthcare. They understand the hard economics of government budgets. But they also understand something the Treasury may be in danger of missing: global health isn't charity. It's a vital investment in our own safety, economy and NHS resilience. When the UK backs health partnerships abroad, it's not altruism. Helping others stay healthy is one of the smartest ways to protect ourselves. Programmes like the Commonwealth Partnerships for Antimicrobial Stewardships funded by DHSC's Fleming fund, link NHS teams with hospitals in low-and middle-income countries to tackle antimicrobial resistance. So far, more than 65,000 health workers have been trained. Prescribing has improved. Infection controls are stronger. Meanwhile, UK staff return with invaluable experience that strengthens our NHS, from leadership under pressure to a deeper understanding of infectious diseases. It's the kind of low cost, high impact intervention any sensible government should double down on. Before the 2021 cuts, a programme called the UK Partnerships for Health Systems was set to train 78,000 global healthcare workers and improve care for hundreds of thousands of patients. It was abruptly slashed by £48million. Programmes were halted. Partnerships paused. Opportunities for mutual learning lost. That was the last government. We did not expect to see the same thing happen under this government, with its distinguished track-record of supporting UK Aid over many decades. The letter from the Presidents of Diaspora Associations makes it clear what this means in real terms – not just for patients in low-income countries, but for UK health care workers whose knowledge and innovation stem from these international exchanges. One in five NHS workers is a non-UK national. Their expertise connects the UK to over 200 health systems worldwide. They help make the NHS one of the most internationally engaged healthcare systems on the planet. Many trained in countries with fragile systems. Many are already playing leadership roles in linking British institutions with their counterparts overseas. In Tanzania, a partnership led by Northumbria Healthcare NHS Trust helped introduce laparoscopic surgery and set up a burns unit. In Ethiopia, Nottingham's NHS trust collaborated with Jimma University to improve trauma and diabetes care. The return on investment? More skilled, confident UK staff - and stronger UK healthcare at home. Health partnerships do far more than train workers. They help develop curricula, fortify health systems overseas and importantly, build Britain's global reputation at a time when influence is in short supply. The UK-Africa Health Summit earlier this year showed the power of collaboration, bringing together Ministers, health leaders and diaspora professionals to forge solutions on workforce mobility and pandemic preparedness. This diplomacy is with a scalpel, not a sword – and it works. The Chancellor faces tough choices. But cutting the global health budget and not mitigating the consequences, would be a false economy. It would weaken our defences against future pandemics, shrink the NHS's talent pipeline and damage our standing in the world. As the letter from diaspora leaders makes clear: this is not a plea for charity. It's a call for strategic investment. Let's not wait for the next global crisis to remind us that disease doesn't respect borders. Let's act now – to protect the NHS, promote economic stability and ensure Britain remains a trusted force for health and progress worldwide. Ben Simms is CEO of Global Health Partnerships (formerly THET) Protect yourself and your family by learning more about Global Health Security Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
