• 'There's going to be a lot of pensioners living in poverty,' says Barbara Parker, a local coordinator for Women Against State Pension Inequality (WASPI)
• 'Before Labour were reelected, in opposition, they were massive, massive supporters of our cause, now they're in government, they're not interested,' Lynne Ruddock, another WASPI coordinator, tells Anadolu

LONDON

For many British women born in the 1950s, the way that the government has implemented a shift in the state pension age brought not just financial strain but also a sense of betrayal.

The group Women Against State Pension Inequality (WASPI) is pushing for compensation, arguing that women affected by the changes received minimal notice, unlike men, and were thus left unprepared amid today’s high cost of living.

WASPI began campaigning in 2015, calling for redress over the UK government’s sudden changes in the state pension age, which saw the women’s retirement age rise from 60 to 65 in 1995, and then to 66.,

❝There’s going to be a lot of pensioners living in poverty❞

The group Women Against State Pension Inequality (WASPI) speak out against UK's 'unfair' new rules, arguing that women affected by the changes received minimal notice, unlike men https://t.co/DUULUw1NEY pic.twitter.com/CmhFbdctKg

— Anadolu English (@anadoluagency) November 6, 2024

Unlike men, who received six years’ notice of a one-year rise, many women born in the 1950s had just one or two years to prepare for a six-year increase. They argue that this discrepancy left them financially vulnerable and unprepared for retirement.

In March, the Parliamentary and Health Ombudsman (PHSO) acknowledged that the government failed to adequately inform women of these changes. But despite this finding, the government has yet to introduce a compensation scheme.

Last week, WASPI held a rally at Parliament Square in London, coinciding with the Labour Party’s first budget announcement since coming to power and urging the government to address their grievances.

According to Lynne Ruddock, a WASPI coordinator, the ombudsman’s findings should be grounds for compensation. "They've been given a varying amounts of compensation that each WASPI woman should be given," she told Anadolu, underlining the movement’s commitment to keep campaigning.

Ruddock criticized the previous Conservative government for sidestepping the issue, saying they ignored it knowing "they weren't getting reelected" come the election earlier this year.

She also accused the new Labour government of failing to uphold its past support for WASPI's cause now that it holds power. "Before Labour were reelected, in opposition, they were massive, massive supporters of our cause. Now they're in government, they're not interested," she said.

'There's going to be a lot of pensioners living in poverty'

Barbara Parker, another local coordinator for WASPI, emphasized the financial hardship that the changes have caused, particularly amid rising living costs.

For many affected women, the financial loss is significant, amounting to about £40,000 to £50,000 (nearly $52,000-$65,000) per person.

"There's going to be a lot of pensioners living in poverty," Parker asserted, adding that some who rent their homes cannot qualify for pension credits, excluding them from benefits like the heating allowance.

Another protester, Liddell, criticized the government's disregard for the ombudsman's recommendations. "Labour were in favor when the Conservatives were in power, saying, 'Yes, you do deserve it.' They've come into power, and now they're saying, 'We don't have the money'," she said.

Although no formal compensation promise was ever made, she questioned why the ombudsman’s recommendations are being ignored: "Why do we have an ombudsman, if the government then totally disregards what the ombudsman says?"

For many women in WASPI, inadequate pension benefits and rising costs have meant choosing "between heating and eating," Liddell added. She warned that the ongoing hardship could lead to health issues, increasing strain on the National Health Service.

Such decisions demand more in-depth consideration of potential effects on people, she argued:

"They need to start doing real impact assessments before they make these decisions."