Lewes Councillors Back Calls To Compensate Waspi Women

Lewes councillors have called on the government to “reconsider” its decision not to pay compensation to women who saw changes to their state pension age.

On Tuesday (March 4), Lewes District Council agreed a motion connected with the long-running Women against State Pension Injustice (WaSPI) campaign, which concerns women born in the 1950s who saw an increase in the age they became eligible for state pensions.

Campaigners have long argued the women affected were not adequately informed about the changes and suffered injustice as a result.

The motion, tabled by Liberal Democrat councillor Christine Brett and seconded by Independent councillor Imogen Makepeace, asked the council to call on the government to reconsider its decision not to pay compensation to these women in line with an ombudsman’s recommendation.

Introducing the motion, Cllr Brett said:

“Women born in the 1950s are suffering financially. These women have worked hard, raised families and paid their tax and National Insurance with the expectation that they would be financially secure when reaching 60.

“It is not the pension age itself that is in dispute, it is widely accepted that women and men should retire at the same time.

"The issue is that the rise in women’s state pension age has been too rapid and has happened without sufficient notice being given to those affected, leaving women with no time to make alternative arrangements.”

When state pensions were first introduced in 1948, women became eligible at the age of 60, while men became eligible at the age of 65.

In 1995, the then Conservative government announced plans to equalise the state pension age for men and women, with the changes then due to have been introduced gradually between 2010 and 2020.

In 2010, the Conservate-Liberal Democrat coalition government brought forward these changes to 2018. The state pension age for both men and women then increased again to 66 in 2020.

The state pension age is currently expected to rise again to 67 between 2026 and 2028, and to 68 between 2044 and 2046.

The calls for compensation are not directly connected to pension age increases or even the acceleration of the changes in 2011.

They instead focus on whether the changes were properly communicated by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) and the impact this may have had on the ability of women born in the 1950s to plan for their retirement.

In 2021, the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO) found that the DWP, as a result of decision making between 2005 and 2007, had “failed to take adequate account of the need for targeted and individually tailored information” about the changes.

While the DWP changed its approach and began sending out targeted information in 2007, the ombudsman said the affected women should have had at least 28 months’ more individual notice of the change.

While the ombudsman said this delay had not resulted in “financial loss”, they also said it amounted to “maladministration” and recommended the women affected should each be paid £2,950 in compensation.

This recommendation was rejected by Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall in December last year, who argued the compensation — which she said could cost as much as £10.5 billion — would not “be a fair or proportionate use of taxpayers’ money.”

In its original form, part of the motion called on Lewes District Council to declare that it “deeply regrets a decision of a Labour Government to ignore an independent non-party political ombudsman’s assessment that compensation should be paid”.