What is a Waspi woman and what happened to them?

Published

8 months ago

March 21, 2024

admin

Back in the 1990s, a row was brewing over the state pension.

After it was introduced for everybody back in 1948, men were entitled to receive it when they hit 65, but women started getting the payments from the age of 60.

Politics live: Tories suffer another defection to Reform

With more women heading to work and longer life expectancies, many argued it was time to even out the playing field and bring women’s retirement age in line with men’s.

And come 1995, John Major’s Conservative government introduced the Pensions Act, setting out a timetable to make the change.

The legislation said the qualifying age for the state pension would slowly increase over 10 years between 2010 and 2020.

But come 2010 and the entrance of David Cameron’s coalition government, there was a desire to make cuts and save cash.

In 2011, a new Pensions Act was introduced that not only shortened the timetable to increase the women’s pension age to 65 by two years but also raised the overall pension age to 66 by October 2020 – saving the government around £30bn.

The changes in the law led to a backlash from the women affected – namely those born in the 1950s.

They complained many women weren’t appropriately notified of the changes by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) back in 1995, with some only receiving letters about it 14 years after the legislation passed.

Others claimed to only have received a notification the year before they had been expecting to retire, aged 60, while more said they never received any communication from the department at all.

And when the law changed again in 2011, there was again little or no notice from the government as women had to re-plan their retirements once more.

Come 2015, a group of women impacted by the situation set up Women Against State Pension Inequality – or Waspi for short – to campaign on their behalf.

The group took no issue with plans to equalise the pension age, but they claimed millions of women had suffered financially because of the lack of time they had to plan their retirements.

By October 2018, Waspi had secured a full scale inquiry into the actions of the DWP by the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO).

It took five years for them to carry out their work, but when they released their report in March 2024, it was damning.

The PHSO said thousands of women might have been impacted by the DWP’s “failure to adequately inform them” about the change to their state pension age, and they ruled compensation was “owed”.

The report suggested the compensation figure per person – based on the sample cases its authors have seen – should fall between £1,000 and £2,950.

But the ombudsman’s chief executive, Rebecca Hilsenrath, said she had “significant concerns” the DWP will not act on its findings and its recommendations – which are not legally binding – so PHSO had “proactively asked parliament to intervene and hold the department to account”.

Both the DWP and Number 10 have said they will consider the ombudsman’s report and respond to their recommendations formally “in due course”.

But the Liberal Democrats are calling on the government to confirm payouts for “these courageous women, who have tirelessly campaigned for justice after being left out of pocket”.

Politics

Coinbase CEO to meet with Trump to discuss personnel appointments — WSJ

Published

5 hours ago

November 18, 2024

admin

Coinbase CEO to meet with Trump to discuss personnel appointments — WSJ

Before US Election Day, Brian Armstrong said Coinbase was “prepared to work” with either a Kamala Harris or Donald Trump administration.

Politics

Row over how many farms will be affected by inheritance tax policy – as PM doubles down ahead of farmers protest

Published

6 hours ago

November 18, 2024

admin

Row over how many farms will be affected by inheritance tax policy - as PM doubles down ahead of farmers protest

Sir Keir Starmer has insisted the “vast majority of farmers” will not be affected by changes to Inheritance Tax (IHT) ahead of a protest outside parliament on Tuesday.

It follows Chancellor Rachel Reeves announcing a 20% inheritance tax that will apply to farms worth more than £1m from April 2026, where they were previously exempt.

But the prime minister looked to quell fears as he resisted calls to change course.

Speaking from the G20 summit in Brazil, he said: “If you take a typical case of a couple wanting to pass a family farm down to one of their children, which would be a very typical example, with all of the thresholds in place, that’s £3m before any inheritance tax is paid.”

Politics latest: No 10 insists chancellor has been ‘straight’ about her CV

The comments come as thousands of farmers, including celebrity farmer Jeremy Clarkson, are due to descend on Whitehall on Tuesday to protest the change.

And 1,800 more will take part in a “mass lobby” where members of the National Farmers’ Union (NFU) will meet their MPs in parliament to urge them to ask Ms Reeves to reconsider the policy.

Speaking to broadcasters, Sir Keir insisted the government is supportive of farmers, pointing to a £5bn investment announced for them in the budget.

He said: “I’m confident that the vast majority of farms and farmers will not be affected at all by that aspect of the budget.

“They will be affected by the £5bn that we’re putting into farming. And I’m very happy to work with farmers on that.”

Sir Keir’s spokesman made a similar argument earlier on Monday, saying the government expects 73% of farms to not be affected by the change.

Environment, Farming and Rural Affairs Secretary Steve Reed said only about 500 out of the UK’s 209,000 farms would be affected, according to Treasury calculations.

However, that number has been questioned by several farming groups and the Conservatives.

Government figures ‘misleading’

The NFU said the real number is about two-thirds, with its president Tom Bradshaw calling the government’s figures “misleading” and accusing it of not understanding the sector.

The Country Land and Business Association (CLA) said the policy could affect 70,000 farms.

Conservative shadow farming minister Robbie Moore accused the government last week of “regurgitating” figures that represent “past claimants of agricultural property relief, not combined with business property relief” because he said the Treasury does not have that data.

Agricultural property relief (APR) currently provides farmers 100% relief from paying inheritance tax on agricultural land or pasture used for rearing livestock or fish, and can include woodland and buildings, such as farmhouses, if they are necessary for that land to function.

Farmers can also claim business property relief (BPR), providing 50% or 100% relief on assets used by a trading business, which for farmers could include land, buildings, plant or machinery used by the business, farm shops and holiday cottages.

APR and BPR can often apply to the same asset, especially farmed land, but APR should be the priority, however BPR can be claimed in addition if APR does not cover the full value (e.g. if the land has development value above its agricultural value).

Mr Moore said the Department for the Environment, Farming and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) and the Treasury have disagreed on how many farms will be impacted “by as much as 40%” due to the lack of data on farmers using BPR.

Lib Dem MP Tim Farron said last week1,400 farmers in Cumbria, where he is an MP, will be affected and will not be able to afford to pay the tax as many are on less than the minimum wage despite being asset rich.

Politics

Cabinet split over assisted dying as Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson latest to reveal she will vote against bill

Published

6 hours ago

November 18, 2024

admin

Cabinet split over assisted dying as Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson latest to reveal she will vote against bill

A split is emerging in the cabinet, with Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson revealing she will join several of her colleagues and vote against the bill to legalise assisted dying.

Ms Phillipson told Sky News she will vote against the proposed legislation at the end of this month, which would give terminally ill people with six months to live the option to end their lives.

She voted against assisted dying in 2015 and said: “I haven’t changed my mind.

“I continue to think about this deeply. But my position hasn’t changed since 2015.”

Politics latest: Starmer on Ukraine as he attends Rio G20

MPs will be given a free vote on the bill, so they will not be told how to vote by their party.

The topic has seen a split in the cabinet – however, Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has yet to reveal how he will vote on 29 November.

Ms Phillipson joins some other big names who have publicly said they are voting against the bill

These include Deputy PM Angela Rayner, Health Secretary Wes Streeting, Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood and Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds.

Border security minister Angela Eagle is also voting against the bill.

Senior cabinet members voting in favour of assisted dying include Energy Secretary Ed Miliband, Science Secretary Peter Kyle, Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall, Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy, Northern Ireland Secretary Hilary Benn, Transport Secretary Louise Haigh and Welsh Secretary Jo Stevens.

The split over the issue is said to be causing friction within government, with Sir Keir rebuking the health secretary for repeatedly saying he is against the bill and for ordering officials to review the costs of implementing any changes in the law.

Sky News’ deputy political editor Sam Coates has been told Morgan McSweeney, the PM’s chief of staff, is concerned about the politics of the bill passing.

He is understood to be worried the issue will dominate the agenda next year and, while he is not taking a view on the bill, he can see it taking over the national conversation and distracting from core government priorities like the economy and borders.

Details of the bill were published last week and include people wanting to end their life having to self-administer the medicine.

It would only be allowed for terminally ill people who have been given six months to live.

Two independent doctors would have to confirm a patient is eligible for assisted dying and a High Court judge would have to give their approval before it could go ahead.