DWP and Labour forced to issue NEW statement over WASPI compensation
People can create petitions which force the Labour Party government to respond once they have hit 10,000 names
DWP and Labour forced to issue NEW statement over WASPI compensation
The government will be forced to issue a NEW statement over WASPI payouts – after a petition calling for compensation for the women affected smashed through a key threshold.
On the Parliamentary website, people can create petitions which force the Labour Party government to respond once they have hit 10,000 names. At 100,000 signatures, this goes even further – with MPs forced to debate the issue.
After a WASPI campaign was launched on the site, nearly 60,000 signatures have been logged backing it. The petition says: ” Government apology and compensation for 1950s Women affected by pension changes.
” We ask Government to deliver a fair, timely, fully transparent apology that reflects ALL evidence based on what we think constitutes maladministration and discrimination; and addresses the financial, emotional and personal hardship experienced by 1950s women caused by pension changes.
“Many 1950s-born women have faced lifelong and historic discrimination, compounded by the Government’s failure to properly communicate State Pension Age changes.
” DWP Ministers have listened only to a group representing a fraction of those affected, leaving others feeling ignored. As many campaign groups unite, we think it is unacceptable that the Government continues to silence the majority.
“After decades of inequality, accountability and action are long overdue.” So far, 57,202 signatures have backed the petition.
100,000 signatures are required to be considered for a debate in Parliament. But, tellingly, the government responds to all petitions that get more than 10,000 signatures.
After it hit this threshold, and more, the DWP now has 20 days to respond. Defending itself over not paying out sums to WASPI women, the DWP says that the majority of 1950s-born women knew about the State Pension age change before it came into effect.
If compensation were paid, it would have the potential to be distributed “to women who did not experience injustice”, the DWP said.
And the government said that “the PHSO’s assumption that unsolicited letters, if received earlier, would definitely have been read and recalled is flawed as the evidence suggests otherwise”.
The Government response stated: “Creating a scheme to assess individual impact, or based on self-certification would be a highly impractical and time-consuming process, particularly given the difficulties of establishing what individuals knew around 20 years ago…
“Introducing a financial compensation scheme is neither fair nor feasible and would not represent good value for taxpayers, and, as a consequence, one will not be set up.”
