Women’s Changed State Pension Age: Compensation Debate
Full Debate: Read Full DebateDepartment: Department for Work and Pensions
Claire Young
Main Page: Claire Young (Liberal Democrat - Thornbury and Yate)Department Debates - View all Claire Young's debates with the Department for Work and Pensions
Women’s Changed State Pension Age: Compensation
Claire Young Excerpts(4 days, 2 hours ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Claire Young (Thornbury and Yate) (LD)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stringer. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for South Cotswolds (Dr Savage) on introducing the debate so powerfully.
WASPI women faced inequalities in the workplace and in finance. Many entered the workforce before the Sex Discrimination Act 1975, which at least in theory introduced equal pay and made it possible for women to get credit cards, loans and other financial products without the support of a man. Statutory maternity pay was not introduced until after many had already had their children, and it was only in 1990 that their income was recognised for taxation purposes as their own, rather than their husband’s.
The principle of an equal pension age is right. The issue is the lack of timely notification, denying WASPI women the chance to plan their finances in an informed way. That is yet another injustice for the WASPI women generation, and it is one that has had real consequences. For example, one of my constituents, born in 1955, found out that her state pension age was increasing to 66 just before her 60th birthday. It was too late to plan any differently, so she ploughed on, but she was forced by leukaemia to retire just before her 65th birthday, leading to financial hardship.
This was also a generation where caring responsibilities overwhelmingly fell to women. That is illustrated by another of my constituents, who was aiming to retire at 60, in part to help to care for her elderly mother. She was denied that opportunity due to the failure to communicate clearly the state pension age changes. As a result, she missed out on being able to care for her dying mother due to needing to work for longer. She told me how she would have welcomed a letter giving her enough notice about the changes, as that may have allowed her to plan her finances further ahead, to allow her more time with her mother. The impact that the changes have had not only on WASPI women themselves, but on their family and loved ones—who these women often care for as they get older—is an often overlooked factor. That concern will only grow as time goes by.
To conclude, there is clear evidence of injustice, and I urge the Government to listen to the ombudsman’s decision and address that injustice as promised.