This website uses cookies for anonymised analytics and for account authentication. See our privacy and cookies policies for more information.





The voice of Scotland’s vibrant voluntary sector

Published by Scottish Council for Voluntary Organisations

TFN is published by the Scottish Council for Voluntary Organisations, Mansfield Traquair Centre, 15 Mansfield Place, Edinburgh, EH3 6BB. The Scottish Council for Voluntary Organisations (SCVO) is a Scottish Charitable Incorporated Organisation. Registration number SC003558.

Swinney tells Waspi women to continue fighting Westminster


20 December 2024
by Robert Armour
 

Labour government rejects compensation for thousands of Scots women

Scotland’s Waspi women have met with first minister John Swinney who called the UK Government “disgusting” for its decision not to compensate them.

The women against state pension inequality (Waspi) campaign group represent 250,000 women born in the 1950s who have been short-changed on their state pensions due to rule changes.

It comes after work and pensions secretary Liz Kendall said the government does not believe paying a flat rate to women at a cost of up to £10.5 billion would be a fair or proportionate use of taxpayers’ money.

Swinney urged the campaign to continue to fight Westminster.

He said: “I think what’s got to happen is that there has to be a sustained amount of pressure maintained on the United Kingdom government about this.

"I don’t think any of us and I would certainly encourage you not to feel that this is somehow the end of the road.

“I would encourage you to continue and to sustain the pressure that you’re putting on.

“And we will do likewise. So at a number of different levels, we will do that formally as a Scottish Government, we will make, we will apply that pressure to the UK Government.”

An investigation was launched into the Waspi women’s complaints in 2018. It reported in March 2024.

The Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman concluded that the Department of Work and Pensions had not communicated the changes properly to the women concerned,

The ombudsman recommended that the women should get some compensation saying they should get payments of between £1,000 and £2,950 - that is less than the Waspi campaign group asked for, which was £10,000 per woman. 

Angela Madden, chairwoman of Waspi, called the decisions bizarre and said the government had ignored recommendations of an independent watchdog.

“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,” she said.

Linda Carmichael, one of the Waspi women, said: “We’ve been campaigning for over eight years, and we really thought our campaign was getting somewhere.

“This announcement from Liz Kendall is really a cruel blow to all of the work that we’ve put in over the years.

“You don’t go into a campaign looking what the end result will be exactly but you do hope that you’ll be treated fairly and injustices will be righted, which we have been promised by politicians over the years. And unfortunately, this hasn’t happened.”

Caroline Abrahams, charity director at Age UK, said: “Everyone understands that the public finances are under acute pressure, but the government should not rub salt in the wounds of those impacted by suggesting there is no case for compensation.

“The fact that many of the women affected will also be coping with the loss of their winter fuel payment this year will intensify their sense of injustice.”

Unison head of equality Josie Irwin said the decision “is a cruel blow to a generation of women”, adding: “The government must find a way to resolve this desperately unfair situation. Refusing to pay compensation is not the answer.”

Prime Minister Keir Starmer said he understood the concerns of the Waspi women but the government had to protect the taxpayer.

“I do understand, of course, the concern of the Waspi women,” he said.

“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.”

 

Comments

Be the first to comment