Waspi campaign accuses Starmer of 'misinformation', saying he overstated awareness of planned pension age rise
The Women Against State Pension Inequality (Waspi) campaign has accused Keir Starmer of spreading “misinformation” about the plight of women who were not given proper warning about the rise in their state pension age.
Referring to Starmer’s claim at PMQs that 90% of women affected by the increase knew that it was coming (see 12.34pm and 2.21pm), Angela Madden, the Waspi chair, said:
This isn’t just misleading; it’s an insult to millions of 1950s-born women who were blindsided by these changes. The ombudsman’s findings were based on rigorous evidence showing that 60% of women had no idea their own state pension age was rising.
The government’s attempt to cherry-pick data to suggest otherwise is spreading dangerous misinformation, plain and simple.
Waspi says the 90% figure quoted by Starmer covers includes people who only had vague idea that the state pension age was going up. Madden said:
The fact that 90% of women had some general awareness of potential changes in the future does not mean they knew this would impact them personally.
That is exactly why the ombudsman identified maladministration and why this government’s continued attempts to muddy the waters are so unacceptable.
Madden also said that Waspi was “not giving up”. She said MPs were meeting to discuss how they could arrange for a vote on compensation to take place in the Commons. And the campaign was also taking legal advice on its options, she revealed.
Keir Starmer has been accused of spreading “misinformation” after he told MPs at PMQs that 90% of women affected by the rise in the state pension age knew it was happening. (See 3.19pm.)He was responding to complaints from opposition and Labour MPs about the government’s decision not to compensate the Waspi woman. Anas Sarwar, the Scottish Labour leader, later became the most senior figure in the party to say the government had made a mistake. In an interview, Sarwar said the government should offer some sort of compensation. (See 4.24pm.) But Starmer told MPs that “the taxpayer simply can’t afford the burden of tens of billions of pounds of compensation”. (See 12.34pm.)
Poor areas will benefit much more than richer areas from the local government settlement announced today, the Institute for Fiscal Studies thinktank has said. (See 5.47pm.)
Wes Streeting, the health secretary, has has challenged the idea that some pensioners could die due to changes to the winter fuel allowance. Giving evidence to the Commons health committee, Streeting insisted pensioners will “still be better off this winter than they were last winter”. Asked about a 2017 Labour party estimate that 4,000 people could die if the then government removed the winter fuel allowance. Streeting replied:
Because of the choices that the chancellor has made, particularly on protecting the state pension through the triple lock – even taking into account the decisions she’s taken on winter fuel allowance – pensioners will still be better off this winter than they were last winter, and will be better off next winter further still.
And of course, one of the reasons it gives me confidence to stand by that assertion is she has protected winter fuel allowance for the poorest pensioners and put in place financial support, which I think will make a real difference to people.
County councils, which tend to be more prosperous (and more Conservative) than other local authorities, have reached much the same conclusion on the local government settlement as the IFS. (See 5.47pm.) This is from Barry Lewis, finance spokesperson and vic chair fo the County Councils Network.
While we welcome the government providing a further £200m for social care, today’s provisional local government finance settlement confirms our fears that the government is unfairly cherry picking which councils deserve the greatest financial support next year.
By targeting the £600m Recovery Grant on metropolitan and urban councils, the government is ignoring the fact deprivation is not the only driver of councils’ costs nor the key indicator of which councils are under the most financial distress. Instead, it is demand and market failure across adult and children’s social care and special educational needs services that are pushing councils in all regions and of political control to the brink.
Deprived areas to benefit most from local government settlement, says Institute for Fiscal Studies
Poor areas will benefit much more than richer areas from the local government settlement announced today, the Institute for Fiscal Studies thinktank says. In a comment on an analysis of the announcement it has published, Kate Ogden, an IFS economist, said:
Today’s announcement of funding for English councils next year is a clear statement of intent by the government to channel funding to more deprived, typically more urban parts of the country. Core spending power is set to increase 2.4 times as fast in real-terms in the most deprived tenth of areas as in the least deprived tenth, with a wider measure of funding including new revenues from levies on producers’ use of packaging up 1.8 times more in the most deprived areas than in the least.
Most shire districts are set to see little if any increase in core spending power next year. The saving grace for them is that, relatively speaking, they are the biggest recipients of the new revenue stream from producers’ use of packaging – with it amounting to an equivalent of an extra 8% in core funding. This funding is only guaranteed for one year though and the amount raised by the levy in future will be lower the more successful it is in getting producers to cut back on the amount of packaging they use. Spending pressures mean district and other councils may feel the need to use this revenue to fund core service provision. But they may have to start weaning themselves off it in the not-too-distant future.
Analysis of local government settlement Photograph: IFS
Government may take over from Post Office responsibility for two of its Horizon compensation schemes, MPs told
The government is considering taking over responsibility from the Post Office for redress schemes for post office operators impacted by the Horizon scandal, PA Media reports. PA says:
Business minister Gareth Thomas gave a statement to MPs where he said that £79m has been paid to 232 people from the Horizon convictions redress scheme, but that the government had “concerns” about the Post Office’s ability to deliver the Horizon shortfall scheme and the overturned conviction scheme.
The Horizon Convictions Redress Scheme was launched by the government to enable people wrongly convicted of a crime because of the Horizon IT system used by the Post Office to apply for financial redress.
The Horizon shortfall scheme allows subpostmasters to apply either for a £75,000 fixed sum award or to have their application fully assessed, and is run by the Post Office.
The overturned conviction scheme is also run by the Post Office and is eligible for anyone whose Horizon-related conviction has been overturned by the courts.
Thomas outlined a number of areas the government was considering amending some parts of the redress system as there are still “complex cases to resolve”.
He said: “There are still concerns about the responsibility of the Post Office to deliver the Horizon shortfall scheme and the overturned conviction scheme. The government is considering the merits of my department taking over this responsibility, but the benefits of such a move must clearly outweigh the disruption that could potentially be caused. We are carefully considering what, if any, intervention we may take.”
Defence review will consider case for missile defence system covering UK, John Healey says
The government’s strategic defence review (SDR) will consider the case for developing a missile defence system for the UK, John Healey, the defence secretary, has said. He disclosed this in an interview with Tonight with Andrew Marr, on LBC, which goes out at 6pm. Asked if the defence review would consider a missile defence system, Healey replied:
Yes, in the SDR, when the prime minister commissioned it, we published the terms of reference, and it includes reviewing the strength of our homeland defences, and that in this day and age, with the sort of sabotage and threats that we’ve seen – for instance, to our undersea cables and communication lines – has a number of levels, and the SDR is considering that.
Tom Belger at LabourList is keeping a tally of Labour MPs who have spoken out publicly against the government’s decision not to compensate the Waspi women. Currently, there are 16 names on the list. But, in private, more Labour MPs have expressed their alarm about this, Belger says – and not just leftwingers.
Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar criticises government's decision not to compensate Waspi women
Severin Carrell
Anas Sarwar, the Scottish Labour leader, has attacked the decision not to compensate the Wapsi pensioners and urged UK ministers to look at other ways of providing financial support.
Speaking at the Scottish parliament, Sarwar said:
I don’t think the decision the government has come to is the right one on compensation; I think they’ve come to the right place on injustice and I think they’ve come to the right place on an apology but I don’t think they’ve come to the right decision on compensation.
Given the public finances, I think a different way forward could’ve been found.
Pressed by Peter Macmahon, political editor of ITV Borders, about the furious reaction from the Waspi pensioners, Sarwar added:
I agree with them on their frustration and that’s why I campaigned alongside them, and I accept that frustration.
Therefore, as I say, I don’t think this is the adequate package … I think a fairer decision could’ve been made around the compensation and that fairer decision could have been - recognising the current financial situation - they could’ve looked at targeted support to lower income pensioners, they could’ve looked at tapering, they could’ve looked at increments, they could’ve looked at a whole host of issues.
Sarwar has now attacked several deeply unpopular financial decisions by the UK government which led to Labour’s popularity plummeting, including the decision to heavily cut access to winter fuel payments for pensioners and the refusal to reverse the two-child benefit cap.
Scottish Labour’s popular support has nose-dived in recent weeks, ending a long period where Sarwar’s party was neck and neck with the Scottish National party.
To Sarwar’s frustration, the SNP government used a very beneficial Treasury settlement in the latest budget to reintroduce a universal winter fuel payment and to pledge that in 2026 it will reverse the two child cap, largely funded by UK taxpayers.
Current polling suggests the SNP would comfortably win the 2026 Holyrood elections.
Waspi decision ignores 'systemic disadvantages women already face in pension provision', says Fawcett Society
The Fawcett Society, which campaigns for gender equality and women’s rights, has said it is “bitterly disappointed” by the government’s decision not to compensate Waspi women.
In a statement, Jemima Olchawski, the charity’s CEO says the government is wrong to say women were adequately informed about rise in the state pension age and she says thousands of women suffered “significant hardship” because they were unable to adjust their financial plans in time. She goes on:
This decision ultimately fails to acknowledge the systemic disadvantages women aready face in pension provision. We add our voice to the many calling on the government to reconsider its position and deliver justice for all the women impacted.
You can read the full statement here.
Allow content provided by a third party?
This article includes content hosted on embed.bsky.app. We ask for your permission before anything is loaded, as the provider may be using cookies and other technologies. To view this content, click 'Allow and continue'.
More than 70 MPs and peers back campaign to stop closure of thinktank praised for its Brexit-related research
Lisa O'Carroll
More than 70 MPs and peers have intervened to try and save UK In a Changing Europe (UKICE), an independent thinktank that has specialised in research on the consequences of Brexit and future relations with the EU.
At a time the UK is trying to reset its relationship with Europe and improve Boris Johnson’s Brexit deal, UK in a Changing Europe run by Anand Menon, a professor at King’s College London, is facing closure because of a decision by its financial backer, the Economic and Social Research Council, to end funding.
Among the signatories are Lords Jay, Kinnock, Liddle, McNally and Rennard, all of whom have been vocal during the Brexit debates, MPs Richard Baker, Laula Moran, Antonia Bance and John McDonnell, and Northern Ireland MPs such as Colum Eatwood, who have been central to the Brexit negotiations on the Windsor Framework.
The MPs and peers say in a letter to ESRC that many of them “still rely on UKICE for key information, not least its divergence tracker” from the only team dynamically tracking the regulatory gaps emerging between EU law on UK law since Brexit came into force in 2020.
They go on to say that while no institution should expect open-ended funding, UKICE’s reports are not just “reliable and well informed” but they produce research that is “clear and accessible”, something they say is “surely the whole point of state-funded social science research”.
The point out that “Brexit is indeed a process, not merely an event” and urge ESRC to reconsider its decision.
Another supporter of the campaign is the Labour MP Paul Waugh, a former political journalist. He has posted a copy of the letter on social media.
.@UKandEU has for years produced high quality research on the UK's links with the EU.
Yet it now faces closure because of @ESRC grant cuts.
Some 66 of us Parliamentarians (38 MPs and 28 peers) have signed a cross-party letter urging @UKRI_News to reconsider their decision. pic.twitter.com/McGHU4OQMU
YouGov has released polling that suggests only 13% of Britons think Kemi Badenoch looks like a prime minister in waiting. Some 53% think she doesn’t look like a prime minister in waiting, and the rest are not sure.
Given that Badenoch has only recently started in this role, and that the next election may well be more than four years away, that probably does not matter much. But, in its analysis, YouGov points out that when Keir Starmer first became Labour leader, 32% of people said he looked like a PM in waiting, and only 33% said he didn’t.
The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government has now published its news release summarising the local government funding settlement for England for 2025-26. (See 2.14pm.) Here are the key points.
£69bn of funding will be injected into council budgets across England to help them drive forward the government’s Plan for Change through investment and reform and to fix the foundations of local government, ministers have announced today.
The provisional local government finance settlement will provide £69bn for councils across the country, a real-terms increase of 3.5% from 2024-25, which includes a new emergency £600 million Recovery Grant, offering better value for money through the repurposing of grants to help support councils most in need and maximise every penny of public spending to ensure it delivers for working people.
And £3.7bn of funding will be made available to social care authorities to support adult and children’s services through the settlement. This includes £880m for the Social Care Grant – an increase of £200m compared to what was indicated last month, taking its total to £5.9bn – which will support councils to deliver care for adults and children in their communities, helping to reduce pressure on the NHS.
No council will see a reduction in core spending power. Places with a significant rural population will on average receive around a 5% increase in their core spending power to ensure rural communities have the support they need. We are maintaining the previous government’s referendum threshold for council tax , which will be maintained at 3% with 2% for the adult social care precept to protect local taxpayers
Waspi campaign accuses Starmer of 'misinformation', saying he overstated awareness of planned pension age rise
The Women Against State Pension Inequality (Waspi) campaign has accused Keir Starmer of spreading “misinformation” about the plight of women who were not given proper warning about the rise in their state pension age.
Referring to Starmer’s claim at PMQs that 90% of women affected by the increase knew that it was coming (see 12.34pm and 2.21pm), Angela Madden, the Waspi chair, said:
This isn’t just misleading; it’s an insult to millions of 1950s-born women who were blindsided by these changes. The ombudsman’s findings were based on rigorous evidence showing that 60% of women had no idea their own state pension age was rising.
The government’s attempt to cherry-pick data to suggest otherwise is spreading dangerous misinformation, plain and simple.
Waspi says the 90% figure quoted by Starmer covers includes people who only had vague idea that the state pension age was going up. Madden said:
The fact that 90% of women had some general awareness of potential changes in the future does not mean they knew this would impact them personally.
That is exactly why the ombudsman identified maladministration and why this government’s continued attempts to muddy the waters are so unacceptable.
Madden also said that Waspi was “not giving up”. She said MPs were meeting to discuss how they could arrange for a vote on compensation to take place in the Commons. And the campaign was also taking legal advice on its options, she revealed.
Comments (…)
Sign in or create your Guardian account to join the discussion