Connect with us

Published

on

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.

Major/Rifkind Bosnia n/c
Image:
John Major introduced legislation to even out the pension age in 1995. Pic: PA

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.

The new British Prime Minister David Cameron (left) with the new Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg on the steps of 10 Downing Street in central London, before getting down to the business of running the country.
Image:
David Cameron and Nick Clegg’s coalition focused on saving cash. Pic: PA

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).

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

MP sings Beatles hit to highlight Waspi plight

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”.

Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp

Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News

Tap here

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”.

Continue Reading

Politics

Crypto investor charged with kidnapping, torturing an Italian for passwords

Published

on

By

Crypto investor charged with kidnapping, torturing an Italian for passwords

Crypto investor charged with kidnapping, torturing an Italian for passwords

A Manhattan crypto investor is facing serious charges after allegedly kidnapping and torturing an Italian man in a disturbing bid to extract access to digital assets.

John Woeltz, 37, was arraigned on Saturday in Manhattan criminal court following his arrest on Friday. He stands accused of holding a 28-year-old Italian man captive for weeks inside a luxury townhouse in Soho, reportedly rented for $30,000 per month.

According to police reports cited by The New York Times, the victim arrived in the US on May 6 and was allegedly abducted by Woeltz and an accomplice.

The attackers are said to have stolen the man’s passport and electronic devices before demanding the password to his Bitcoin (BTC) wallet. When he refused, the suspects allegedly subjected him to prolonged physical abuse.

Crypto investor charged with kidnapping, torturing an Italian for passwords
Source: Mario Nawfal

Related: Violent crypto robberies on the rise: Six attacks that targeted investors

Crypto victim beaten, electroshocked

The victim described being beaten, shocked with electricity, assaulted with a firearm and even dangled from the upper floors of the five-story building.

He also told police that Woeltz used a saw to cut his leg and forced him to smoke crack cocaine. Threats were also reportedly made against his family.

Photographic evidence found inside the property, including Polaroids, appears to support claims of sustained abuse. The victim managed to escape on Friday and alert authorities, leading to Woeltz’s arrest.

Woeltz was charged with four felony counts, including kidnapping for ransom, and entered a plea of not guilty. Judge Eric Schumacher ordered him to be held without bail. He is expected back in court on May 28.

A 24-year-old woman was also taken into custody on Friday in connection with the incident. However, she was seen walking freely in New York the next day, and no charges against her were found in the court’s online database.

Authorities have yet to clarify the relationship between the suspect and the victim or whether any cryptocurrency was ultimately stolen.

Related: Crypto crime goes industrial as gangs launch coins, launder billions — UN

Crypto executives turn to bodyguards

Executives and investors in the crypto industry are increasingly seeking personal security services as kidnapping and ransom cases surge, especially in France.

On May 18, Amsterdam-based private firm Infinite Risks International reported a rise in requests for bodyguards and long-term protection contracts from high-profile figures in the space.

French authorities have responded by introducing enhanced protections for crypto entrepreneurs and their families, including security briefings and priority access to police assistance.

This comes amid a recent surge in kidnappings and ransom attempts. David Balland, the co-founder of hardware wallet company Ledger, was kidnapped in January 2025 and held for ransom for several days before being rescued by French police.

In May 2024, the father of an unnamed crypto entrepreneur was freed from a ransom attempt after French law enforcement officials raided the location in a Paris suburb where the individual was being held hostage by organized criminals.

Magazine: Bitcoiner sex trap extortion? BTS firm’s blockchain disaster: Asia Express

Continue Reading

Politics

PM could lift controversial benefit cap in budget – as Farage makes two big election promises

Published

on

By

PM could lift controversial benefit cap in budget - as Farage makes two big election promises

Sir Keir Starmer could decide to lift the two-child benefit cap in the autumn budget, amid further pressure from Nigel Farage to appeal to traditional Labour voters.

The Reform leader will use a speech this week to commit his party to scrapping the two-child cap, as well as reinstating winter fuel payments in full.

The prime minister – who took Westminster by surprise at PMQs by revealing his intention to row back on the winter fuel cut – has previously said he would like to lift the two-child cap if the government could afford it.

There are now mounting suggestions an easing of the controversial benefit restriction may be unveiled when the chancellor delivers the budget later this year.

According to The Observer, Sir Keir told cabinet ministers he wanted to axe the measure – and asked the Treasury to look for ways to fund the move.

It comes after the government delayed the release of its child poverty strategy, which is expected to recommend the divisive cap – introduced by former Tory chancellor George Osborne – is scrapped.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Why did Labour delay their child poverty strategy?

Ministers have already said any changes to winter fuel payments, triggered by mounting political pressure, would only be made when the government’s next fiscal event rolls round.

The Financial Times reported it may be done by restoring the benefit to all pensioners, with the cash needed being clawed back from the wealthy through the tax system.

The payment was taken from more than 10 million pensioners this winter after it became means-tested, and its unpopularity was a big factor in Labour’s battering at recent elections.

Before Wednesday’s PMQs, the prime minister and chancellor had insisted there would be no U-turn.

More from Sky News:
PM’s winter fuel claim ‘not credible’
Starmer vs Reeves – the ‘rift’ in Downing Street

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Will winter fuel U-turn happen?

Many Labour MPs have called for the government to do more to help the poorest in society, amid mounting concern over the impact of wider benefit reforms.

Former prime minister Gordon Brown this week told Sky News the two-child cap was “pretty discriminatory” and could be scrapped by raising money through a tax on the gambling industry.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Brown questioned over winter fuel U-turn

Mr Farage, who believes Reform UK can win the next election, will this week accuse Sir Keir of being “out of touch with working people”.

In a speech first reported by The Sunday Telegraph, he is expected to say: “It’s going to be these very same working people that will vote Reform at the next election and kick Labour out of government.”

Continue Reading

Politics

First renationalised train service starts today – but not how you’d have hoped…

Published

on

By

First renationalised train service starts today - but not how you'd have hoped…

South Western Railway (SWR) has been renationalised this weekend as part of the government’s transition towards Great British Railways.

The train operator officially came under public ownership at around 2am on Sunday – and the first journey, the 5.36am from Woking, was partly a rail replacement bus service due to engineering works.

So what difference will renationalisation make to passengers and will journeys be cheaper?

Pic: PA
Image:
Pic: PA

What is nationalisation?

Nationalisation means the government taking control of industries or companies, taking them from private to public ownership.

Britain’s railway lines are currently run by train operating companies as franchises under fixed-term contracts, but Labour have said they want to take control of the lines when those fixed terms end.

In its manifesto, the party vowed to return rail journeys to public ownership within five years by establishing Great British Railways (GBR) to run both the network tracks and trains.

Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander said renationalising SWR was “a watershed moment in our work to return the railways to the service of passengers”.

“But I know that most users of the railway don’t spend much time thinking about who runs the trains – they just want them to work,” she added. “That’s why operators will have to meet rigorous performance standards and earn the right to be called Great British Railways.”

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

How reliable are UK trains?

How will ticket prices be affected?

Labour have argued cutting off payments flowing into the private sector could save the taxpayer £150m a year.

But the government has not explicitly promised the savings made from nationalisation will be used to subsidise fees.

It is unlikely rail fares will fall as a result of nationalisation, rail analyst William Barter told Sky News.

“The government could mandate fare cuts if it wanted to, but there’s no sign it wants to,” he said.

“At the moment, I’m sure they would want to keep the money rather than give it back to passengers. The current operator aims to maximise revenue, and there’s no reason the government would want them to do anything differently under government control.”

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

UK has most expensive train tickets in Europe

What difference will it make for passengers?

Britain’s railways are frequently plagued by delays, cuts to services and timetable issues, but Mr Barter said nationalisation will make very little day-to-day difference to passengers.

There was “no reason to think” the move would improve issues around delays and cancellation of services, he said.

“It’s going to be the same people, the same management,” he explained.

“The facts of what the operator has to deal with in terms of revenue, infrastructure, reliability, all the rest of it – they haven’t changed.”

Pic: PA
Image:
Pic: PA

Which services are being next to be nationalised?

In the longer term, the move is likely to bring “a degree of certainty compared with relatively short-term franchises”, Mr Barter said, noting the government would only want to renationalise a franchise “because in one way or another something very bad is going on in that franchise, so in a way it can only get better”.

It also means the government will have greater accountability for fixing problems with punctuality and cancellations.

Mr Barter said: “If this is the government’s baby, then they’re going to do their best to make sure it doesn’t fail. So rather than having a franchise holder they can use as a political scapegoat, it’s theirs now.”

He added: “In the short term, I don’t think you’d expect to see any sort of change. Long term, you’ll see stability and integration bringing about gradual benefits. There’s not a silver bullet of that sort here.”

Next to be renationalised later this year will be c2c and Greater Anglia, while seven more companies will transfer over when their franchises end in the future.

Continue Reading

Trending