Starmer dismisses demands for £10.5bn of compensation for so-called WASPI women – despite previously backing huge payouts over bungled state pension age increase

Keir Starmer was accused of breaking promises to so-called ‘WASPI’ women today after dismissing calls for them to receive £10.5billion in compensation.

An estimated 3.8million born between April 6, 1950, and April 5, 1960, were affected by a change to the state pension age from 60 to 65 between 2010 and 2020.

They say they suffered financially and were left worse off in retirement because they were not given enough notice about it happening.

But the PM insisted he could not add to the ‘burden’ on taxpayers despite the government apologising for delays in sending out letters telling them about the change.

Campaigners branded a decision to over-rule an ombudsman who recommended they should get almost £3,000 each a ‘betrayal’ and a ‘day of shame’ – with Labour already under fire from pensioners for slashing winter fuel payments.

The party’s own backbenchers lined up to condemn the rejection in Parliament, branding it ‘appalling’. 

The head of the Unite union, Sharon Graham, branded it a ‘disgrace’ and senior Tories took aim at Labour’s ‘cynicism’ in siding with WASPI campaigners prior to winning power.

Sir Keir previously supported Jeremy Corbyn’s pledge to give WASPI women £58billion during the 2019 general election, and endorsed ‘fair and fast’ compensation as recently as 2022.

Conservative MP Helen Whateley, the shadow work and pensions secretary, told Labour they needed to ‘own’ their decision not to provide compensation.

She warned the government they could not ‘try to dodge responsibility by suggesting to WASPI women that, if times were different, they might have come to a different conclusion’.

‘I am not going to let them get away with saying that there is no compensation because of a fictional black hole in the public finances,’ she added.

‘The country’s financial position now is a result of their political choices.’

Alicia Kearns, a fellow Tory shadow minister, shared a photo on social media of Labour’s Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall previously posing with WASPI campaigners when not in government.

‘I’m guessing we’ll be hearing a lot of Labour’s current favourite line: ‘… that was our position in opposition, but now we’re in government’,’ she wrote.

Former Tory Cabinet minister Sir Simon Clarke said the ‘deep cynicism of Labour in opposition is coming back to haunt them in Government’.

Announcing the government’s decision in the Commons earlier, Ms Kendall flatly rejected an ombudsman’s report suggesting a scheme of payouts of up to £2,950 for each individual affected.

She claimed most women knew about the change anyway and suffered ‘no direct financial loss’.

She argued that a compensation scheme for more than three million people would impose ‘significant cost’ on the taxpayer and not be ‘fair or appropriate’. 

But the report by the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO) found that affected women should have had at least 28 months’ more individual notice of the changes by the Department for Work and Pensions.

It also said that for women who were not aware of the changes, the opportunity that additional notice would have given them to adjust their retirement plans was lost due to delay.

The PHSO further suggested that compensation at level four, ranging between £1,000 and £2,950, could be appropriate for each of those affected.

Speaking to broadcasters on a visit to Estonia today, Sir Keir said he understood the anger of those affected

‘The ombudsman’s findings were clear in relation to maladministration, but also clear about the lack of direct financial injustice, as the ombudsman saw it,’ he said.

‘That’s why we’ve taken the decision that we’ve taken.

‘But I do understand, of course, the concern of the Waspi women. But also I have to take into account whether it’s right at the moment to impose a further burden on the taxpayer, which is what it would be.’

Ms Kendall said the PHSO report ‘doesn’t sufficiently recognise’ that 73 per cent of women were aware of the age increase. 

She told the Commons: ‘These two facts: that most women knew the state pension age was increasing and that letters aren’t as significant as the Ombudsman says, as well as other reasons, have informed our conclusion that there should be no scheme of financial compensation to 1950s-born women, in response to the Ombudsman’s report.’

She added: ‘The alternative put forward in the report is for a flat-rate compensation scheme, at level four of the Ombudsman’s scale of injustice, this would provide £1,000 to £2,950 per person at a total cost of £3.5billion and £10.5billion.

‘Given the vast majority of women knew the state pension age was increasing, the Government does not believe paying a flat rate to all women at a cost of up to £10.5billion would be fair or proportionate to taxpayers.’

Ms Kendall said the rejection of a scheme was an ‘extremely difficult decision to take’.

Ms Kendall said: ‘We believe it is the right course of action, and we are determined to learn all the lessons to ensure this type of maladministration never happens again.’

The Work and Pensions Secretary said the Government would develop an action plan to fix problems identified in the report, and set a clear notice of any future changes to the state pension age.

She said that future pension communications would also use ‘the most up to date methods’ to contact those affected, and cited the existing online Check Your State Pension service.

Ms Kendall said: ‘We haven’t taken this decision lightly, but we believe it is the right decision because the great majority of women knew the state pension age was increasing, sending letters earlier wouldn’t have made a difference for most and the proposed compensation scheme isn’t fair or value for taxpayers’ money.’

However, a string of Labour MP criticised the government in the House.

Brian Leishman, MP for Alloa and Grangemouth, said: ‘Firstly I’d like to say I’m appalled at this announcement and I have campaigned with Waspi women, as have many parliamentary colleagues, and this is an incredible let down.

‘Waspi women, in my opinion, certainly do not need words of disappointment and they certainly do not need hollow statements. What they need is justice.’

Gareth Snell, who represents Stoke for Labour, told the Commons: ‘This will be a sad moment for the 4,000 women in Stoke-on-Trent Central who I have previously campaigned alongside for justice and a fair transition and I understand the Secretary of State’s need to balance the budget given what was left by the previous government.

‘But could I ask her is this ‘no compensation now because of the economic circumstances we find ourselves in’ or is it a ‘no compensation ever’? If we find ourselves in the future in a much better economic state, will she consider readdressing this issue and seeing what compensation might be available for those women that were affected?’

Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes MP Melanie Onn said women had quit jobs based on incorrect information about pensions.

‘(Liz Kendall) says this report is about the way that it was communicated to those 1950s-born women and earlier letters would not have made a difference,’ she said.

‘But I say they would have made a difference, they would have made a difference when it comes to individuals’ financial planning, in their retirement dates and notice they were giving to their jobs, from their wider family arrangements and commitments that they made.

‘There have undoubtedly been losses for those 1950s-born women and the honourable member for Stoke Central has just given the Government an opportunity to reconsider this at some point in the future. Is she sure that she won’t take that offer?’

Outside Parliament, Angela Madden, Chair of Women Against State Pension Inequality said: ‘The Government has today made an unprecedented political choice to ignore the clear recommendations of an independent watchdog which ordered ministers urgently to compensate WASPI women nine months ago.

‘This is a bizarre and totally unjustified move which will leave everyone asking what the point of an ombudsman is if ministers can simply ignore their decisions. It feels like a decision that would make the likes of Boris Johnson and Donald Trump blush.

‘The idea that an ‘action plan’ to avoid such mistakes in future should be the result of a six-year Ombudsman’s investigation is an insult both to the women and to the PHSO process.

‘An overwhelming majority of MPs back WASPI’s calls for fair compensation and all options remain on the table. Parliament must now seek an alternative mechanism to force this issue on to the order paper so justice can be done.’