[arista]

[Sir Keir Starmer has defended a decision
not to compensate women affected by
changes to their retirement age - saying
doing so would "burden" the taxpayer.

The prime minister said he understood
the concerns of the Women Against
State Pension Inequality - often known
as Waspi women - but their demands
were not affordable.

He was speaking after Work and
Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall
issued an apology for a 28-month delay
in sending out letters to those born in the 1950s
impacted by state pension changes.]

https://news.sky.com/story/compensat...-says-13275438



Before the Election Starmer was backing all
Waspi women

[Cherie]

Nothing is affordable, where are all our taxes going?

[Oliver_W]

Why does he suddenly care about burdening the tax payer?

[arista]

[arista]

[arista]

2022

[Cherie]

Betray the pensioners
Betray the farmers
Betray the Waspi women

Rail workers who got a massive pay deal going on strike

its gone well Sir Keir

[Mystic Mock]

Not a good look for the Labour Party imo.

[UserSince2005]

They lost out on getting equality? What about all the men who actually lost out for being men?

[Livia]

Ł8 million a day for illegals who have never benefitted the country. THAT burdens the tax payer but that's fine, apparently.

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by UserSince2005

They lost out on getting equality? What about all the men who actually lost out for being men?

That is not the issue, the issue is the DWP did not communicate the changes in good time

[arista]

[Livia]

The pictures of Starmer and Rayner pre-election, posing with the women and promising their support. The Labour government is made up of hypocrites, their supporters must be so disappointed in their decisions so far.

[Gusto Brunt]

Let's be honest, 60 isn't old these days.

The retirement age for women was way too low anyway.

Why should these women get 6 years 'lost' pension when men have to wait to 66, going up to 67 in 2 years.

[Oliver_W]

Originally Posted by Gusto Brunt

Let's be honest, 60 isn't old these days.

The retirement age for women was way too low anyway.

Why should these women get 6 years 'lost' pension when men have to wait to 66, going up to 67 in 2 years.

I read somewhere it was related to the average age gap in relationships, so the husband and wife would retire around the same time.

That could easily be nonsense, as could other explanations I've read about women retiring sooner because "they're weaker" etc etc.

Whatever, I do think it's right that the retirement age is the same. I don't have a fully formed opinion on the Waspi Women, but I do think it's typical of politicians to break promises.

[Gusto Brunt]

Originally Posted by CheapLousyFaggit

I read somewhere it was related to the average age gap in relationships, so the husband and wife would retire around the same time.

That could easily be nonsense, as could other explanations I've read about women retiring sooner because "they're weaker" etc etc.

Whatever, I do think it's right that the retirement age is the same. I don't have a fully formed opinion on the Waspi Women, but I do think it's typical of politicians to break promises.

It should be. Women live longer than men by about 5 years on average.

Being 60 these days really is like being 40 to most people.

Take a look at what 60 year olds looked like in 1910 and in 2024.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Gusto Brunt

Let's be honest, 60 isn't old these days.

The retirement age for women was way too low anyway.

Why should these women get 6 years 'lost' pension when men have to wait to 66, going up to 67 in 2 years.

See Cherie's answer.

Originally Posted by Cherie Christmas

That is not the issue, the issue is the DWP did not communicate the changes in good time

[joeysteele]

I have no real side on this as to paying compensation or not.
I do too think it right retirement age should be the same for men and women.

I understand as much from what's been said by the ombudsman, that a good number were informed adequately.
However certainly not all.

I know there's rumblings among LABOUR MPs, not happy that Ms Kendall has ruled out ANY compensation at all.
Not that the waspi women would likely have ever got anything from the Conservatives.

So it's a wait and see how it progresses I guess.
I wouldn't be against any compensation being paid and think some will probably eventually come.

I recall the general election campaign however in 2019, when it seemed there was a bottomless pit from Labour as to spending.
I recall in the election campaign, when Corbyn shouted out that Labour would pay compensation to the waspi women.
I and the team I was campaigning with just groaned.
Because he hadn't a clue as to how much it would cost.

However from the voters and people we came across, they were furious he'd promised to compensate them.
I found very few then who supported that at all.

It was unaffordable then in 2019 and it's even moreso unaffordable now.
It's pretty annoying too to see the LibDems getting high and mighty on this, when in coalition they voted to accelerate the process of the retirement age.
If a way can be found to compensate some then I wouldn't be opposed to that I guess.

[bots]

i think it's nuanced. No-one likes to see their terms messed around and changed in their future retirement while they are working. For me this revolves around notice when the changes would take effect and the upshot is that life isn't like it was in the old days, people aren't forced to retire when they hit retirement age. It may be inconvenient for people to continue to work past the date they originally planned, but nothing actually stops them from doing so, so other than being annoyed that a previous term limit has changed, thats basically the extent of the impact. Does that really warrant compensation to half the population of a certain age? Was it ever going to be practical to give that number of people compensation? No, of course not.

The real problem is that politicians who weren't in power wanted to make the current government uncomfortable, knowing full well, if they were faced with the compensation claim, they would reject it too. It was all encouraged by politicians not being honest with the people they are supposed to represent. Unfortunately the current labour party have been repeatedly caught out since they came into power, they have got so used to lying for the last 15 years, they are completely caught with their pants down.

It's a different problem to the one that is currently being presented. It's about honesty and trust and politicians across politics have lost the trust of the british public

[Livia]

My Mum was forced to retire at 60. She didn't want to, she'd have happily worked on but she wasn't allowed.

[Mystic Mock]

Originally Posted by Gusto Brunt

It should be. Women live longer than men by about 5 years on average.

Being 60 these days really is like being 40 to most people.

Take a look at what 60 year olds looked like in 1910 and in 2024.

The woman at the bottom is 60 in that picture?

[Oliver_W]

Originally Posted by Santa Goth

The woman at the bottom is 60 in that picture?

And this is her now at 70:

[rusticgal]

Originally Posted by Livia

My Mum was forced to retire at 60. She didn't want to, she'd have happily worked on but she wasn't allowed.

Yes I remember a lady at work wanting to stay on in the job she loved…she was devastated.

[Mystic Mock]

Originally Posted by CheapLousyFaggit

And this is her now at 70:

You're pulling my leg?

She looks in her 50's in that picture.

[The Slim Reaper]

No one should have to work until the grave (unless by choice).