Government’s Waspi Compensation Refusal Called “Slap in the Face” by Sisters

Three sisters have characterized the government’s determination not to provide compensation in the “Waspi” women’s pension matter as a “slap in the face”. The Parliamentary Ombudsman stated that over three million women born in the 1950s did not receive adequate notification of the adjustments to the increases in the state pension age and should be compensated. Waspi campaigners Mary Waterhouse, 72, Susan Dutton, 69, and Norma Elkinton, 67, all from Blackpool, asserted that the government had “let them down”. Chancellor Rachel Reeves has defended the government’s stance, remarking that “given the vast majority of people did know about these changes, I didn’t judge it would be the best use of taxpayers’ money to pay an expensive compensation bill”. The Women Against State Pension Inequality (Waspi) group indicated that women born in the 1950s were not properly informed that their state pension age would increase from 60 to 65 (now 66). Nine months ago, a parliamentary ombudsman had recommended compensation ranging from £1,000 to £2,950. Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall informed the Commons on Tuesday that this would not occur. “Given the vast majority of women knew the state age was increasing, the government does not believe paying a flat rate to all women at a cost of up to £10.5bn would be a fair or proportionate use of taxpayers money,” she stated. Kendall had previously spoken of the “injustice” faced by Waspi women, with a post from 2019 still available on Kendall’s website detailing her commitment to the campaign. Ms Dutton commented: “When she talks about the burden on the taxpayer, we were and still are the taxpayer.” “It absolutely infuriates me. I have never been so angry,” she added, further expressing her belief that most women had “lost about £48,000”. Ms Waterhouse conveyed: “I can’t tell you how let down we feel.” Ms Elkinton appended: “It’s a slap in the face to us.” She also suggested that the function of the parliamentary ombudsman was now without purpose. “What’s the point in having an ombudsman if their judgements doesn’t mean anything?” “That wasted six years. How much did all that cost? Their government department was set up to tackle injustice such as this.” Rebecca Hilsenrath, the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman, said: “I welcome the government’s recognition that mistakes were made, and the commitment from the Secretary of State to make sure this never happens again.” She continued: “However, the government’s decision not to accept our recommendations in full is disappointing and will have been hard for the women to hear.” The sisters, who have been campaigning for eight years, have pledged to continue their advocacy. “We’re not stopping and we’ll carry on fighting for justice,” Ms Waterhouse declared.