MP likens Government to flat-earthers over refusal to compensate Waspi women
The Government last December ruled out a compensation package for women born in the 1950s, whose state pension age was raised so it would be equal with men.
This is despite Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer and Chancellor Rachel Reeves being among the senior ministers to support the Waspi campaign when Labour was in opposition.
A report by the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO) had recommended the UK Government pay compensation to women born in the 1950s whose state pension age was raised so it would be equal with men.
The watchdog also said the women should be paid up to £2,950 each, a package with a potential total cost of £10.5 billion to the public purse, as poor communication meant they had lost out on the chance to plan their retirement finances.
The Women Against State Pension Inequality (Waspi) group is currently seeking a judicial review to force the Government to reconsider its decision to rule out a compensation package.
Work and pensions minister Torsten Bell, who is also a Treasury minister, said the Government does not agree with the Ombudsman's approach 'to injustice or to remedy'.
Speaking in the Commons, Ms Long Bailey argued that 'cost does not need to be and should not be a barrier to justice', as she urged the Government to introduce a wealth tax to fund a compensation scheme.
The MP for Salford said: 'I don't want (Mr Bell) to go down in history as the man who denied justice for the 1950s women, I honestly don't. I want to see action on this, and I want him to go down as the person who finally, finally managed to award them justice.
'But at the moment, he's got to understand that the arguments being put forward by the Government are absurd, to say the least. In fact, they're akin to somebody arguing that the world is flat, in denying the Ombudsman's report.'
Waspi campaigners outside the Royal Courts of Justice in London (Haixin Tan/PA)
Earlier in her contribution, the former Labour leadership candidate, who had called the debate, disputed the Government's assertion that the women knew the change was coming.
She said: 'Whilst the Government agreed with the finding of maladministration and apologised, no redress would be forthcoming.
'And contrary to the Ombudsman, they actually felt that the majority of women did know about changes to their pension age, based on Department for Work and Pensions research, and that sending the women letters would not have been effective, which I'm sure most people would agree is bizarre.
'It's pretty effective when a bill addressed to you coming through your door comes through, it's pretty effective when it's a hospital appointment, it's pretty effective on the very rare but joyous occasion that HMRC gives you a tax rebate cheque.
'So, I ask, honestly, would 1950s-born women have actively refused to open letters with their name on from the DWP? It makes no sense.'
Ms Long Bailey went on to say: 'In terms of options to make sure that schemes could be financially sustainable, Waspi have calculated that HM Treasury have saved a whopping £181 billion alone by increasing the state pension age.
'Well, there's other options, there's the option of applying a 1% to 2% wealth tax on assets over £10 million, raising up to £22 billion a year. Equalise capital gains tax with income tax rates, raising £15.2 billion a year. Apply national insurance to investment income, raising £8.6 billion a year.
'End stealth subsidies on banks, and you get up to £55 billion over the next five years, and even Gordon Brown has advocated for this. So cost does not need to be, and should not be, a barrier to justice.'
During the debate, Independent MP for Hayes and Harlington, John McDonnell joked that the Government would soon be proscribing the Waspi group.
On Wednesday, MPs supported legislation to proscribe the Palestine Action group as a terrorist organisation.
Mr McDonnell said: 'I pay tribute to the campaign. A lot of those ladies have been patronised over the years, it was a terrific campaign. In fact, it was so terrific under this Government at the moment, they would probably be proscribed.'
Responding to the debate, Mr Bell said: 'We agree that letters should have been sent sooner. We have apologised, and we will learn the lessons from that.
'However, as honourable members and campaigners on this issue are well aware, we do not agree with the Ombudsman's approach to injustice or to remedy.'
He added: 'An important consideration when making this decision was that evidence showed that sending people unsolicited letters is unlikely (to) affect what they knew, which is why letters are sent, but they are sent as part of wider communication campaigns.
'This evidence was not properly considered by the Ombudsman.
'Another consideration was that the great majority of 1950s-born women were aware that the state pension age was changing, if not their specific state pension age.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
South Wales Argus
13 minutes ago
- South Wales Argus
DWP benefit cuts hit people with Parkinson's and MS
Claimants in this category will be entitled to a higher rate of the benefit, and will not be routinely reassessed to receive money. Labour backbencher Graeme Downie has proposed a welfare reform Bill amendment, so universal credit claimants with Parkinson's or MS (multiple sclerosis) who cannot work do not face repeated medical assessments to receive a payout. If MPs back his amendment, patients with 'evolving' needs who cannot work could also qualify for a higher rate of benefits. The Government's Bill has already cleared its first Commons hurdle at second reading, after work and pensions minister Sir Stephen Timms vowed not to restrict eligibility for the personal independence payment (Pip), with any changes coming in only after a review of the benefit. To meet his promise, ministers have had to table amendments to their own draft new law, to remove one of its seven clauses, which MPs will debate next Wednesday. Universal credit claimants with Parkinson's 'are already possibly struggling financially', Mr Downie said, ahead of the debate. He added: 'The cost of living with a condition like Parkinson's can be very high. You may well require or need additional support.' Today the UK government published its Bill that will cut eligibility criteria for, and access to, Personal Independence Payments (PIP). Here is our response 👇 🧵1/3 — Parkinson's UK (@ParkinsonsUK) June 18, 2025 The Dunfermline and Dollar MP said patients who struggle with their motor control might buy pre-chopped vegetables or chicken. 'Those things are expensive, so if you're already on universal credit and you're struggling, being able to do that significantly impacts your health, it significantly impacts your ability to live properly,' he continued. To qualify, claimants must have limited capability for work or work-related activity (LCWRA) and symptoms which 'constantly' apply. 🚨 Reminder: cuts to disability benefits affect everyone. You might not need disability benefits today. Or tomorrow. But you can become disabled at any time and find yourself in need of a financial safety net. — Scope (@scope) July 3, 2025 Mr Downie's amendment would expand these criteria to claimants with 'a fluctuating condition'. It would cover 'conditions like Parkinson's but also multiple sclerosis, ME (myalgic encephalomyelitis), long Covid and a whole range of other conditions where, you know, in the morning things could be really good and in the afternoon things could be really bad, and even hour by hour things could change', he said. 'I felt it was necessary to table an amendment to really probe what the Government's position is on this, and ensuring that people with Parkinson's and conditions like that are not excluded from even applying and being considered.' Mr Downie's proposal has backing from 23 cross-party MPs so far. Recommended reading: Juliet Tizzard, external relations director at Parkinson's UK, said: 'Criteria in the Bill say that a new claimant for the universal credit health payment will have to be 'constantly' unable to perform certain activities to qualify. 'This doesn't work for people with Parkinson's, whose symptoms change throughout the day. 'People with Parkinson's and other fluctuating conditions like multiple sclerosis will be effectively excluded from getting all the financial support they need. 'The Government has responded to our call and withdrawn the damaging restrictions to Pip. 'Now, they must do the same with the universal credit health element. The health of many people with Parkinson's is in their hands.'
Reuters
15 minutes ago
- Reuters
Welfare cuts U-turn shows extent of UK's fiscal challenges, S&P says
LONDON, July 4 (Reuters) - The inability of Britain's government to make cuts to welfare spending this week underscores the extent of the challenges it faces in repairing its finances, credit rating agency S&P Global said on Friday. UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer was forced to scrap 5 billion pounds ($6.83 billion) worth of benefits cuts due to opposition from within his own government, reducing the already razor-thin margin it relies on to meet its self-imposed fiscal rules. "We consider the inability to make modest cuts to welfare spending, which has ballooned in the UK since the 2020 pandemic, underscores the UK government's very limited budgetary room for manoeuvre," S&P said in an analysis. S&P has a "stable" outlook on its AA UK credit rating and though it sees the fiscal position as "vulnerable" it said the direct effect of this week's last-minute policy reversal was small in the context of the country's "existing fiscal challenges". The now-cancelled 5 billion-pound-a-year of mainly disability allowance cuts would have amounted to 0.2% of 2025 GDP, by 2029. That compares with last year's headline government deficit of 5.9% of GDP - equivalent to almost 170 billion pounds. "Getting the deficit down to the pre-pandemic five-year average of 3% of GDP would require a roughly 70 billion pound consolidation effort," said S&P, which is next due to review Britain's rating on October 10. "We expect that the UK's fiscal consolidation will remain a slow process," it added. ($1 = 0.7321 pounds)
ITV News
20 minutes ago
- ITV News
How Kier Starmer's government is scoring with the public one year since the North East turned red
It was just a year after his landslide election victory, but following a high-profile humiliation, Sir Keir Starmer seriously considered quitting. I'm actually talking about how he won the Labour leadership in April 2020, and has admitted he thought about stepping down after defeat at the Hartlepool by-election the following May - rather than any indication that he's considering his future as Prime Minister, following the mess made of welfare reforms this week. It is a reminder that he's succeeded in turning things around before. Then, surely more than anything, he benefited from Conservative implosion. But the late spring of 2021 is also seen as a turning point, when he moved away from a message of unity following Jeremy Corbyn's leadership, and took on the left of his party, moving it to the centre ground - from where he won a thumping majority of MPs at last summer's general election. However, any impression that he had the backing of a 400-strong army of loyal 'Starmtroopers' has now been well and truly shattered, with a rebellion against the government's plans for the benefits system leading to the low point of his premiership so far. Labour MPs from the North East and North Yorkshire were at the heart of some extraordinary scenes in the Commons on Tuesday 1 July. York Central's Rachael Maskell, author of the final amendment trying to block the bill, claimed it would lead to "Dickensian cuts" to support for some of the most vulnerable people in society. Shortly before the vote, Disability Minister Stephen Timms then announced a final huge concession - changes to eligibility for Personal Independence Payment would not take effect until after the conclusions of a review he's leading. Blyth and Ashington MP Ian Lavery angrily declared, "This is crazy, man. This is outrageous, man," about the handling of the situation. City of Durham MP Mary Kelly Foy said: "I popped out for a banana earlier on, and when I came back in, things had changed again, so I'm even more unclear on what I'm voting on." That prompted laughter from colleagues in the Commons, but there's been little reason for ministers to be amused, even if Rachel Reeves' tears at PMQs the following day were due to a "personal issue." Despite the capitulation on the contents of the welfare bill, eight Labour MPs from our region still voted against it. Most of them are firmly left-wing, part of a relatively small caucus that remains within Labour's parliamentary ranks. And, with some timing, we've now seen the announcement of plans to form a new left-wing party, involving Mr Corbyn. It's not wise, though, to get too carried away at this stage - who remembers Change UK? The biggest threat to Labour surely remains Reform UK, as evidenced in May's local elections in our region, and with opinion polls suggesting they would make huge gains across the North East and North Yorkshire if a general election was held now. Chris Eynon, who came second in Sunderland Central last year, told us: "the Red Wall is very, very prime for the taking for the Reform party." They won their first seat on North Tyneside Council this week, though also lost one to the Liberal Democrats in County Durham. That came after one of Reform's councillors resigned within days of being elected, because he also worked for the council and you're not allowed to do both. It's the kind of mishap that opponents will hope to see repeated in the coming months and years, as Reform are really tested for the first time, running Durham County Council and nine others around the country. Of course the final years of Conservative rule at Westminster became defined by a certain level of Berwick MP Anne-Marie Trevelyan was moved between six different cabinet or ministerial roles within five years. She told me this week that the Tories need to gradually rebuild confidence, trying to re-assert themselves as "the sensible party". Of course Labour pledged to bring stability, when they all but swept the board in the North East on their way into government last summer. Bridget Phillipson was the country's first confirmed MP that night, thanks to the speedy Sunderland counting system. She became one of the Prime Minister's key lieutenants as Education Secretary, and we spoke to her today (4 July) after she made a speech to teachers in the North East about making sure children are ready to start school. On the election anniversary, she told us, "We haven't got everything right and I think we'd be the first to acknowledge that, but I'm really proud of the achievements of the last year," pointing to investment in schools, free breakfast clubs, and childcare places within her remit. On room for improvement, she seemed to agree with analysis that ministers haven't been good enough at setting out a real narrative and vision, saying the government should be "clearer in communicating what we're doing". That surely applies to any focus on supporting regions like the North East to tackle regional inequalities - what the Conservatives used to call "levelling up". More quietly, Labour have looked to work closely with regional mayors, and tweaked borrowing and value-for-money rules to allow longer-term investment. We've seen the announcement of the Tyne and Wear Metro being extended to Washington, but also the cancellation of plans to upgrade the A1 in Northumberland. The recent spending review promised investment in 350 deprived areas around the UK, which it's expected will mean funding for things like youth clubs, libraries and community-run grocers, in an effort to bring visible change. That does feel similar to the last government's various funding pots for local regeneration schemes. More widely, Labour ministers argue they have set their own direction by making "tough decisions." It's too early for much data to show whether they've set the country on the right course. But, for example, the future of the two-child benefit cap was a controversial topic when I interviewed Bridget Phillipson a week into her new government role last July, and it's an issue that remains to be resolved now. Another fight with Labour MPs looks likely - particularly with expected welfare savings now lost, the Chancellor having pledged not to raise taxes on "working people", and little sign of roaring economic growth materialising. The next year doesn't look much easier.
