Exclusive

‘The fight’s not over’, vow ‘devastated’ Waspi women after ministers reject multi-billion pound payout plea

17 December 2024, 18:40 | Updated: 17 December 2024, 18:43

Waspi campaign 'devastated' by the government's decision to deny compensation

By Kit Heren

Women hit by changes to the pension age have pledged to continue their campaign despite the government saying they wouldn't be paid billions in compensation.

Listen to this article

Loading audio...

Debbie De Spon, campaign director for Women Against State Pension Inequality (Waspi), told LBC's Tonight with Andrew Marr that the women affected felt "betrayed" by ministers' decision.

Waspi have advocated for support for women who were born in the 1950s and say they did not get adequate warnings about changes to the state pension.

Legislation introduced in 1995 raised the state pension age from 60 to 65 between 2010 and 2020 in order to bring it in line with that of men.

Women born in the 1950s were adversely affected, with the Pensions Act of 2011 accelerating the shift so that the change was completed by November 2018. Around 3.8 million women are estimated to have been impacted.

Read more: Millions of 'Waspi' women 'owed' huge compensation payouts after government's state pension age blunder

Read more: Labour pledges compensation for women caught in pension trap

Labour MP is 'raging' over the government's decision against Waspi women

Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall announced earlier on Tuesday that women affected by changes to the state pension age would not receive compensation.

But Ms De Spon vowed to fight on, saying the campaign "certainly isn’t over as far as we’re concerned, and we will pursue fair and fast compensation for Waspi women, which is what we’ve been asking for."

She added: "We’re devastated - that’s a word that I don’t use very often but one that’s applicable here, and I think Waspi women today will be feeling an enormous sense of betrayal.

She said the sense of being let down was especially acute "from a Labour government, when over the years that we’ve been campaigning we’ve had enormous backbench support, and lots of backbench support from Labour MPs."

Caller Penny brands the government 'disgraceful' as millions of Waspi women are denied compensation

Speaking to MPs earlier, Ms Kendall said: "The Government does not believe paying a flat rate to all women at a cost of up to £10.5 billion would be fair or proportionate to taxpayers."

Ms Kendall did accept the Ombudsman's finding of maladministration and has apologised for a 28-month delay in writing to 1950s-born women.

In a statement, she said: "These two facts: that most women knew the state pension age was increasing and that letters aren't as significant as the Ombudsman says, as well as other reasons, have informed our conclusion that there should be no scheme of financial compensation to 1950s-born women, in response to the Ombudsman's report."

She added: "The alternative put forward in the report is for a flat rate compensation scheme, at level four of the Ombudsman's scale of injustice, this would provide £1,000 to £2,950 per person at a total cost of £3.5 billion and £10.5 billion.

Women Against State Pension Inequality (WASPI) campaigners earlier this year
Women Against State Pension Inequality (WASPI) campaigners earlier this year. Picture: Getty

"Given the vast majority of women knew the state pension age was increasing, the Government does not believe paying a flat rate to all women at a cost of up to £10.5 billion would be fair or proportionate to taxpayers."

The decision has angered backbench MPs across the Commons, including from Labour.

Brian Leishman, the Labour MP for Alloa and Grangemouth in Scotland, told Andrew that "the Waspi women have been historically let down, and not just let down, but they've been betrayed."

He added: "I think that the government's failure to properly communicate pension changes left thousands, if not millions, of women struggling at a time when they should have been able to plan for a dignified retirement."

Others have backed the decision, arguing that the women had time to understand the changes, and that it would be an unfair use of public money.