The final item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S6M-12612, in the name of Clare Haughey, on the publication of the WASPI—women against state pension inequality—Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman final report.
The debate will be concluded without any question being put. I invite members who wish to participate to press their request-to-speak buttons now.
Motion debated,
That the Parliament notes the findings from the UK Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO) final report into the women’s State Pension age and associated issues, published on 21 March 2024; understands that the PHSO has made a finding of failings by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) in this case, and has ruled that the women affected are owed compensation; believes that women born in the 1950s have been treated unfairly by accelerated changes to the State Pension age, under the Pensions Act 1995 and subsequent legislation, and that the changes were not adequately communicated to them; understands that the report finds that many 1950s-born women have experienced financial loss and a negative impact on their health, emotional wellbeing and home life as a result; further understands that around 3.6 million women are impacted, including an estimated 5,000 in the Rutherglen constituency; recognises that, in its stage one report published in 2021, the PHSO found “maladministration” on two counts, the first being in 2005 when the DWP failed to make a reasonable decision about targeting information to the women affected by these changes, and the second being when the DWP proposed, in 2006, writing to women individually to tell them about changes to the State Pension age, but reportedly failed to act promptly; regrets that, as per the findings in the final ombudsman report, the DWP has not acknowledged its failings nor put things right for those women affected, and that it has failed to offer any apology or explanation for its failings and has indicated that it will not compensate women affected by its failure; notes the reported comments by the PHSO chief executive, Rebecca Hilsenrath, that given the “significant concerns” that it has that the DWP will “fail to act on” its findings, and “given the need to make things right for the affected women as soon as possible” the PHSO has “proactively asked Parliament to intervene and hold the Department to account”; understands that the level of compensation recommended by the PHSO is between £1,000 and £2,950; notes, however, that in its submission to the PHSO, the UK Parliament’s All-Party Parliamentary Group on State Pension Inequality for Women argued for compensation at Level 6 on the PHSO scale, of £10,000 or more; pays tribute to what it considers to be the tenacity, commitment and resolve of Women Against State Pension Inequality (WASPI) campaigners who, it considers, despite experiencing what it sees as setback after setback from the UK Government, the PHSO, and in court, have never given up fighting for justice; highlights estimates from the WASPI campaign that, in the past nine years, an estimated 270,000 women impacted have sadly passed away without seeing proper compensation; believes that the WASPI activists have been vindicated in their lengthy campaigning for pensions justice by the PHSO’s findings, and notes the calls for the UK Government and UK Parliament to act swiftly and set up a fair compensation scheme without delay in order to resolve this long-standing issue.
17:13
I am delighted to have secured this debate on the WASPI campaign and the United Kingdom Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman’s final report. I thank colleagues from my party, and from the Green party, who supported the motion.
Established in 2015, the WASPI campaign was set up to protest against the way in which the state pension age for men and women was equalised. The Conservative Government’s Pensions Act 1995 included plans to increase women’s state pension age from 60 to 65, so that it was the same as the age for men. The Pensions Act 2007 introduced a series of increases, starting with a state pension age of 66 between 2024 and 2026, and ending with an increase to 68 between 2044 and 2046.
The Tory and Liberal Democrat coalition Government then introduced the Pensions Act 2011, which accelerated the equalisation of women’s state pension age by 18 months and brought forward, by five and a half years, the increase in men’s and women’s state pension age to 66. Those changes impacted an estimated 3.8 million women who were born in the 1950s, including more than 5,000 in the Rutherglen Westminster constituency. Many had had little or no notice of the changes, which meant that it was too late for them to do any proper financial planning.
I know that MSPs of all parties will have heard from constituents about the impact that the changes had on them. For example, there were those who took early retirement as a result of their own ill health or that of their partner, and who had to go back to work as they belatedly found out that they were not able to receive their pension until years later than they had anticipated. There were people who had to sell their homes, and people who lost all their savings. However, it is about not just the financial hardship, but the emotional distress and the health issues that the situation caused for people.
The tenacity, commitment and resolve of the WASPI women has been quite remarkable. In September 2016, I had the privilege of attending a WASPI march in Glasgow, and I have been delighted to work closely with some of the organisers ever since. My constituent Anne Potter has been one of the key figures in the campaign in Scotland, having set up the Glasgow, Lanarkshire, Dunbartonshire and Renfrewshire WASPI branch in 2016. Anne and other activists, including Kathy McDonald and Rosie Dickson, have organised protests, handed out countless flyers, spoken to print and broadcast media, lobbied politicians at party conferences, and much more. They have kept the WASPI case at the forefront of politicians’ minds ever since, and they have done that despite setback after setback as a result of the intransigence of the UK Government, delays to the PHSO report and defeats in court. Throughout the whole process, the WASPI campaigns have always known that they were right and that they had suffered an injustice.
After around five years, the PHSO published its final report into the issue. In the summary of the complaint and the ombudsman’s findings, the report referred to
“2004 research that DWP was considering in August 2005”,
which
“showed that ... overall, more than half of women affected by the 1995 Pensions Act did not know their State Pension was 65, or between 60 and 65.”
The ombudsman also found that the UK Government had failed to
“give due weight to ... relevant considerations”.
For example, the 2004 research had recommended that information “should be ‘appropriately targeted’”. Despite the UK Government having identified that it could do more, it “failed to provide” the public with as much information as possible.
In addition, the ombudsman’s report found that the Department for Work and Pensions did not “act promptly” enough on its proposal of November 2006 to write directly to women who were affected to tell them about the changes to the state pension age. It also
“failed ... to give due weight to how much time had already been lost since the 1995 Pensions Act.”
The WASPI position has finally been vindicated with the publication of the PSHO’s report. The “maladministration” by the UK Government has now been confirmed, and the ombudsman has been clear that a compensation scheme must be established.
However, like the WASPI women themselves, I am deeply disappointed at the level of compensation that is being suggested. The PHSO recommends compensation levels equivalent to level 4 on its banding scale; that is between £1,000 and £2,950. Compensating all women who were born in the 1950s at the level 4 range would involve spending between £3.5 billion and £10.5 billion of public funds. However, that amount must be considered in context: the UK Government has saved £181.4 billion purely by raising the state pension age of those women.
There has been dither and delay from the Tories over many years. They have had years to resolve this injustice without forcing women to go to the ombudsman or to courts for resolution, and they have had months to respond in full to the PHSO report. However, just as the Tory Government has failed the WASPI women, the same is true of Labour. For years, scores of Labour members of Parliament and MSPs have been vocal in their support for the WASPI campaign. Labour politicians have happily posed for photographs, signed pledges and offered warm words, but at the point at which they should be honouring their promises and paying what is due, they have reneged on the deal. There is not one word in Labour’s manifesto about the WASPI campaign, and we have heard nothing from Sir Keir Starmer or from Anas Sarwar. They have backtracked and U-turned, as they have done on numerous policy positions in recent months. A whiff of power in number 10, and they have abandoned the women who had trusted them to fulfil their promises.
The member is inaccurate in saying that there have been no words from Keir Starmer. When he was in Scotland to launch the first six steps for a Labour Government, he said that there is a duty on the next Government to look at the report and to act on it, so he has clearly outlined that that is important.
More warm words there from the Labour Party—but no action.
Labour has abandoned the WASPI women, but we in the Scottish National Party never will. We have been there with them from the very beginning, and we will be with them until they have received fair compensation. Even as long ago as June 2016, the SNP Westminster group commissioned a report on potential financial remedies for WASPI women; however, it was ignored. Prior to the UK Parliament being dissolved, my SNP colleague at Westminster, Alan Brown, lodged a private members’ bill that would have set up a framework to pay the women “fair and fast compensation”.
The SNP manifesto, which was published today, states that we will
“Stand up for WASPI women by pressing the UK Government to deliver full, fast and fair compensation for women who have been wronged by pension inequality.”
Sadly, around 290,000 WASPI women have died since the start of the campaign; another dies every 13 minutes.
The WASPI scandal has gone on for too long. The PHSO report is clear: the WASPI women have been the victims of “maladministration” and they are entitled to compensation, so what are Labour and the Tories going to do? What are they waiting for? Let us give the WASPI women what they are due, and give it to them as a priority in the new Westminster Parliament.
We move to the open debate.
17:21
I think that it is fair to assume that we all, in one way or another, support the WASPI campaign, and I believe that it is only right that the Parliament has come together on the issue. The WASPI women deserve justice, and few can deny that fact. Sadly, as Clare Haughey mentioned, some of the people who started out on this journey are no longer with us, and some of those who have bravely fought this battle have not seen justice, which is, to say the least, regrettable.
Nevertheless, it is crucial that we in this Parliament consider the PHSO’s report and the wider campaign. The PHSO’s recommendations are very clear, including financial compensation for women who are affected by the change, the maladministration of which is clearly identified in the report. It has taken five years for the PHSO to conclude its report, and it is only fit and proper that the recommendations are taken on board and—crucially—acted on by the next UK Government.
As both the First Minister and the Scottish Conservative leader, Douglas Ross, agreed only last week, this issue is not, and should not be, a political issue, and it is very sad that the debate’s instigator decided to concentrate on that in her speech. There is absolutely no reason why the SNP Government could not step in and take action—[Interruption.]—so it is disappointing that this debate, which is about the WASPI women, has been turned into a political debate—[Interruption.]
Will the member take an intervention?
Clare Haughey rose—
No, I will not take an intervention, thank you very much—[Interruption.]
I will take an intervention from Clare Haughey.
I thank Finlay Carson for labelling me an “instigator”. I am quite happy to be an instigator on behalf of the WASPI campaign.
Pensions are fully reserved to Westminster; this is a mess that Westminster has made. It is not for this Parliament to clear up the mess there. The WASPI women have been clear in their campaign that they want all women across the UK to be compensated.
I thank the member for the intervention, but she did not answer my point. There is no reason that the Scottish Government could not take action. There is nothing—[Interruption.]
There is nothing to prevent that from happening. It is all very well you putting things in your manifesto, when you are expecting someone else to deliver it—
Speak through the chair.
—when the Scottish Government could stand up and deliver support for the WASPI women.
I will move away from the political argument, however, because that is not what my contribution tonight is about. It is a testament to the WASPI women, who have successfully managed to get people from across the political spectrum to listen to the issues and concerns. Crucially, the PHSO remains non-partisan and has listened carefully to the women and accepted that there was “maladministration”. It is important to remember that the report could not look at whether it was right to change the state pension age for women, and no WASPI women whom I have encountered have been against equalisation—rather, they are against how the decision was communicated.
When the state pension was introduced in the 1940s, it had differential ages: 65 for men and 60 for women. In 1993, the then Chancellor of the Exchequer, Ken Clarke, announced that the Government would equalise the state pension age at 65 over a 10-year period, starting in 2010. A year on from 2010, the coalition Government accelerated that equalisation process while, at the same time, raising the relevant age to 66. That meant that the state pension age for women would reach 65 in November 2018 and that the increase to 66 would apply by October 2020.
All along, I have maintained that the Government let many people down by retrospectively changing the rules, which effectively threatened their retirement plans and threw them into chaos. Speaking as a member of a party that looks to individuals to be responsible for their finances, that was more than regrettable.
The Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman service has since released the findings of its investigation into how the Department for Work and Pensions communicated those changes. It concluded that, in 2005, the DWP had failed to make a responsible and reasonable decision about targeting information to the women affected by the changes, and stated that “That was maladministration”. The DWP had proposed to write to women individually, to tell them about the changes to the state pension age, but it had “failed to act promptly”. Unfortunately, the PHSO has made it clear that it is not able to recommend that the DWP reimburse lost pensions, because that would be outside its legal remit.
This issue should be one of the first that the next UK Government tackles, regardless of which party triumphs, and that should include determining the level of compensation to be paid out.
17:26
As many as 3.8 million women were given the news that their state pension age would increase from 60 to 66 just as they were about to retire—when it was too late for them to do any proper financial planning. Such maladministration warrants not only an apology but action. It is an injustice for which women must be promptly and properly compensated by the UK Government.
I congratulate Clare Haughey on securing cross-party support for this important debate. She has consistently spoken up, both in the Parliament and in her community, for the women who have been so wronged by that maladministration.
I also wish to congratulate the WASPI women on their campaign so far. I was pleased to meet Ayrshire WASPI campaigners outside the Parliament as they rallied in the past month or so. However, it was terribly sad to hear that not all the women whom I had previously met are still with us. Their loss compounds the huge sense of injustice that is felt.
What was good to hear was that the women felt well supported by their Ayrshire MPs—in particular, Patricia Gibson, who has represented North Ayrshire and Arran with distinction. I know that it is not only WASPI women who hope that she will be re-elected.
The Scottish National Party will never abandon the WASPI women. We demand justice and compensation for them, and we will not rest until they have it. Clare Haughey’s motion rightly highlights cross-party commitments to delivering justice for the women who have been affected, and I know that there is cross-party support for them in the Scottish Parliament. Unfortunately, any action must come from elsewhere.
I could make arguments about fairness and equality for women, and note how a similar cohort of men would never have been treated in the same way. I could talk, too, about the impact of that injustice on families and children—on children missing out on quality time with their grandparents, adult children missing out on practical support with bringing up their own children, and ageing parents missing out on support and care. However, such arguments are likely to fall on deaf ears. For all those people, we need to take action. In my judgment, any UK Prime Minister—whether he comes with a red tie or a blue one—who continues with a two-child benefit cap and a rape clause will not be particularly persuadable on arguments about fairness for women and families.
Let me make an argument for righting that wrong and for awarding fair and fast compensation to the 1950s women, whom I hope will be valued by an incoming PM. The awarding of such compensation could result in millions of pounds going into local economies. Figures that have been provided to me by the Ayrshire WASPI women from the House of Commons library briefing paper on the topic show that if the 15,000 women in Ayrshire who have been deprived of a full six years of their state pension entitlement were to be compensated by only a quarter of what is owed to them, it would result in £150 million being spent in local communities. In our local economies, that would mean benefits for business and, in turn, employment and training opportunities.
Women told me that being able to retire would help them to take up volunteering roles, which would contribute to the community and to their personal wellbeing. They spoke of the employment opportunities that would open up for younger people when the WASPI women retired, of the health and wellbeing implications of retirement, and of the value of being able to spend more time with grandchildren and supporting parents to work, which brings more money into households and eases money pressures and worries. There would be clear economic and social benefits from righting that wrong.
In addition, more than 60 per cent of the money concerned would go back into the Treasury in income tax, national insurance and VAT paid by women and local businesses. Therefore, the net cost to the UK Government of doing the right thing would be substantially lower than the gross cost.
I gently remind members that there should be no electioneering in the chamber.
17:30
I welcome the chance to debate these issues again and to highlight the WASPI women’s campaign.
As I set out when we last debated the issue, at the beginning of May, in Government time, Scottish Labour welcomed the publication of the PHSO’s detailed report, which, rightly, should command the attention of us all. We had already started to hear about the desire for members to focus on the report and consider it in great detail. Since our previous debate, though, it appears that the report’s findings have not commanded the full attention of the current Conservative UK Government.
More than two months passed between the report’s publication in March and the Prime Minister’s announcement that he was calling a general election in July. During that period, despite calls from campaigners and Opposition parties to publish a full statement and response to the report, the Conservative Government utterly failed to do so. It has had the power to respond, but it has chosen not to do so and to kick the issue into the long grass. As other members have articulated, I do not think that it is right that the UK Government did not take that opportunity to respond while it had access to the information that sits with the Treasury and the DWP.
Following the general election, it will be for the next UK Government to carefully consider the report’s recommendations in full. If Labour is fortunate enough to be elected, we will work to give the report proper consideration. As we have done from the start, we will listen respectfully to the women who have been involved in this injustice. We have to recognise that this is an injustice, as other members have articulated during the debate so far.
We should reflect on the important issues that Ruth Maguire highlighted about the injustice that women, in particular, have experienced in this context. Speaking as a man, I am very conscious of the imbalance in rights and the challenge that exists in trying to achieve equality.
We should also speak of the campaigners, who have been tireless and ferocious in highlighting inequalities and trying to set things right. As I did in May, I take the opportunity to thank them and, indeed, everyone who contributed to the PHSO’s report. Recently, I met WASPI campaigners in Renfrewshire and Inverclyde. We had a constructive discussion about the issues highlighted in the report, the redress that they would like to see and what the next steps might be for any incoming Government.
It is clear that there are a number of challenges. As I have said, we have not had access to all the information that sits with the Treasury and the DWP. It is important that, if the response to the report includes establishing a compensation scheme, the scheme be agreed by those who have been affected. We must ensure that it commands their confidence and meets the aspirations of those who seek redress, perhaps at varying levels. We must also ensure, of course, that the scheme can be properly and fully funded and that the commitment is not made and then not delivered properly.
We know that there are significant challenges not only in relation to the WASPI women but in righting injustices such as the infected blood scandal and the Post Office Horizon scandal. The Windrush generation has not yet been properly compensated, either. The incoming UK Government will have a huge amount of work in its in-tray, which, quite frankly, has not been addressed by the current Conservative Government. It is clear to me that that might take time and that there will be competing interests, but it is important that we consider the report in full and have the Government respond. If Labour is fortunate enough to form that incoming Government, that is what we will do. We will work hand in hand with the WASPI women. We will ensure that we do not make promises that we cannot keep, that justice is done and that there is redress.
17:34
I thank my colleague Clare Haughey for her passionate campaigning on behalf of the WASPI campaign group and for lodging the motion for debate.
Women who were born in the 1950s have been cheated out of their money by the UK Government—it is as simple as that. That money is not a benefit; it is rightfully theirs, and they worked hard for it for many years.
I first spoke in a debate on the issue in the chamber in 2017, and here we are again. Women are still waiting, and empty promises are being made. Clare Haughey’s motion says it all: this is a long-running, depressing saga that, I believe, deserves the same focus as there has been on the sub-postmasters scandal. However, the blame for this one can be laid fairly and squarely at the door of the DWP. The PHSO report clearly states that, and it also states, crucially, that the women deserve compensation now.
As we have heard from members across the chamber, about 3.8 million women have been impacted. I am a WASPI woman, but I am in the extremely fortunate position of still being able to be working and earning, unlike the thousands of women in Scotland and throughout the UK who were cheated out of their pension. I certainly do not feel the impact as they do.
Nonetheless, the bottom line is that women of all backgrounds and means have been cheated out of their money. They have experienced severe financial loss, which has had a negative impact on their health, emotional wellbeing and home life as a result. Sadly, about 270,000 women have not survived to see justice.
Unlike the Labour Party and the Tory party, the SNP Government will not rest until WASPI women receive the overdue justice that they deserve. Warm words and posing for pictures do not cut it—the UK parties must put their money where their mouth is. Indeed, the incoming Labour chancellor, Rachel Reeves, has confirmed that there is no commitment to payments in the Labour manifesto. She has said:
“we won’t put forward anything that is not fully costed and fully-funded and I have not set out any money for this.”
That is shameful.
The Scottish Government has welcomed the findings of the PHSO’s report, which highlights the damning communication failures of the UK Government. However, after years of promises being made by Labour and Tory members, those parties are both now refusing to accept the report’s recommendations to fully compensate the women who have been impacted. That is not just disappointing but a betrayal of every WASPI woman. Those women deserve so much better: they deserve full, fair and fast compensation.
The amount of compensation that the PHSO report recommends is unrealistic and downright insulting. Many women have lost upwards of £40,000 of the pension that they would have had if they had retired at 60 as planned. That might not matter to the people of inherited wealth who make these decisions or to highly paid civil servants with huge pension pots, but for millions of hard-working women in Scotland and throughout the UK, it is devastating. The WASPI campaigners agree with the equalisation of pensions. However, the core of the campaign’s argument concerns the unfair and unjust way in which the changes were implemented, as we now know.
There are hundreds of local WASPI groups throughout Scotland, with courageous campaigners refusing to give up and be demoralised. They will not stop until justice is done, and the SNP will be with them every step of the way in their fight for justice.
17:38
Every 13 minutes, a WASPI woman—a woman who might have lost several years-worth of her pension; maybe as much as £42,000—dies without justice, so I am grateful to Clare Haughey for lodging her important motion and for securing the debate.
Most of all, I thank the women, such as Linda Carmichael and Lorraine Rae in Aberdeen, whose positive and determined campaigning is celebrated and supported today. I thank them for all that they have done and all that they continue to do—Scottish Greens stand in solidarity with them, and we will do so until they receive the apology and the compensation that they deserve.
This is a debate about justice—justice for the women who have been directly affected and for their families and their wider communities. It is also about pension justice for everyone, because the injustices that the WASPI women have suffered mirror other pension injustices such as the wider gender pension gap, the devastating loss of pension benefits that has been imposed by unilateral scheme changes, and the excessive retirement ages for demanding and dangerous professions such as prison officers and emergency workers.
It is a debate, too, about equality. The women whose voices we echo today do not object to pension equalisation. They might justifiably do so, however, remembering the gross unfairness that characterised much of their careers. Many of them might point out that their wages were a fraction of what their male counterparts received; that they were barred from company pension schemes and obliged to choose between work and motherhood, and even marriage; and that they hit their heads on glass ceilings and are expected to live longer, with greater care needs, sustained by significantly smaller pension pots.
17:42
I thank Clare Haughey for securing this important debate and for her commitment to justice. How we treat our pensioners should define our country, but they have been forced into poverty. WASPI women worked tirelessly throughout their lives only to find themselves facing a dreadful delay to receiving their pension. That has left many struggling to make ends meet and facing financial uncertainty at a time when they should be able to retire after decades of work.
In my constituency, it is estimated that more than 4,700 women in East Dunbartonshire and more than 6,000 in West Dunbartonshire have been affected by the changes to the state pension age. The final PHSO report is clear on the failures of successive UK Governments and of the DWP. That comprehensive investigation has found that
“thousands of women may have been affected by DWP’s failure to adequately inform them?that the State Pension age had changed.”
The report is clear that those women are owed compensation, but the amount that is suggested of between £1,000 and £2,950 per person is a paltry sum. I echo WASPI women’s calls for any UK Government to consider higher levels of compensation to reflect the decades of mistreatment.
It is shameful that the women have still not received a formal apology or explanation from the Government, and it is even more worrying that the PHSO chief executive has
“significant concerns”
that the DWP will
“fail to act on”
the findings. The truth is that there will be no change under a Westminster regime.
It is a matter of days until there is a new UK Government, which is likely to be a Labour one. In contrast, it is a matter of days ago that, in this chamber, Paul O’Kane said:
“Labour supports the delivery of justice for WASPI women”,
and Katy Clark said that the next UK Government
“must deliver justice and compensation to those women.”—[Official Report, 1 May 2024; c 44, 55.]
Here we are, and the manifestos are out—the real and the fictitious. There is no honest decency and integrity. I have searched the Labour manifesto and there is no mention of the courageous WASPI women. I even played the game and searched the fictitious Scottish Labour branch office manifesto and—no surprise—following orders, there is no mention in that either. Make no mistake: if you are a WASPI woman, the Labour Party and the Tories are not on your side.
What the women object to—and rightly so, as the UK Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman has confirmed in its final report—is the way in which equalisation was carried out. That was far from equal and far from just. It was unjust in the speed with which it was rolled out, with the UK Government ignoring expert advice; it was unjust in the lack of proper consultation; and it was unjust in the abject failure to inform women of that major change to their circumstances and that fundamental disruption to their lives and retirement plans.
Many women have suffered severe financial loss as a result of that failure. Some have been able to find work, albeit not work that they would have chosen, not with the wages that they would have chosen and not at the times that they would have chosen. Others, bearing health problems or committed to caring for others, have not even had those minimal opportunities for mitigation.
Families have suffered—ageing parents, husbands, wives, partners, children and grandchildren. Communities have suffered, losing activists and volunteers, as well as the pensions that would have been spent in local businesses and social enterprises. We have all, to some extent, suffered from yet another example of Government incompetence, slapdash policy making and indifference to the lives and wellbeing of the people whom it is supposed to serve.
In the last fortnight of this venal UK Government’s plummet from power, we do not expect very much, but it could surprise us. On the way out, it could discover a forgotten ounce of common decency—enough to fuel an apology and a decent level of compensation. We will certainly expect the next occupiers to do that.
When the WASPI women started school, like many of us, they were told to sit down on their allocated chairs, to listen to the teacher and not to speak without putting up their hand. Now, with a lifetime of wisdom and experience, they know that sometimes people should not sit down and they should not shut up. I will sit down and shut up soon, but only to hear more voices of solidarity. The Scottish Greens and I will continue to stand and shout with the WASPI women, as loudly as we can, in their urgent call for equality and justice.
The Labour Party has decided that WASPI women do not matter to it. By contrast, only days ago, our First Minister, John Swinney, reaffirmed the SNP’s position and its concrete commitment in support of full, fair and fast compensation for WASPI women. It is clear that the SNP will champion their right to fast and fair compensation.
I am disappointed by the way in which the member has chosen to characterise the debate. It is clear in what I said that we need to consider the report. With regard to the SNP’s manifesto commitment, has she costed how much the compensation would be, and will she say how it will be paid for? I think that those are fair questions.
No, I have not. The member must be shocked that it is not in Labour’s manifesto. There was no mention of WASPI women in the commitment that it made just the other week. I will get on with my speech.
Despite constant setbacks, WASPI women have remained steadfast in their resolve. In the face of injustice, they have shown determination and courage. They continue to push on for the estimated 270,000 women who have sadly passed away without seeing compensation. I have seen that at first hand, having met many of the fantastic WASPI women—in particular, the co-ordinator of the West Dunbartonshire WASPI group, Liz Daly, who is a selfless, committed and resilient woman.
Time is unfortunately not on their side, so we need to see immediate action on the issue. Those women are here to stay, and we in the SNP will keep fighting for them, because those women have done enough—they have fought for compensation for nearly a decade. They have done the work and now they have been vindicated by the ombudsman’s report.
It is time for Westminster to get to work. We need to see the next UK Government compensate immediately—WASPI women have asked for a commitment within 100 days, so I hope that Labour will make that commitment—or stand aside and let the SNP Government do just that. We must let real change happen. If Labour is really honest, our WASPI women must get the justice they deserve.
17:46
I, too, extend my thanks to Clare Haughey for bringing this important debate to the chamber.
As the motion highlights, the UK Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman published its final report into the women’s state pension age and associated issues in March this year. The ombudsman made a finding of failings by the Department for Work and Pensions and ruled that the women affected are owed compensation. I have supported the Women Against State Pension Inequality campaign almost since the campaign began. I am a WASPI woman—I should perhaps confess that, too.
As the deputy convener for the cross-party group on WASPI, I have had the privilege of meeting many campaigners from across Scotland, including from my constituency. I pay tribute to them all. They have been working tirelessly for years to fight for justice. Their courage and sheer dogged determination to never give up deserves our admiration.
Many women have faced poverty and financial hardship as a result of the failings highlighted by the ombudsman. I am pleased that the long-overdue report recognises that WASPI women deserve compensation for the financial hardships that they have suffered as a result of the DWP’s maladministration. It is shocking that the Conservative UK Government did not accept the DWP’s maladministration. There has been plenty of time for the findings to be considered and for a compensation scheme to be put in place.
The consequences of delay are stark. As Liberal Democrat Wendy Chamberlain said in a debate in Westminster, WASPI women are
“dying without the DWP admitting to its errors, without any acknowledgement of the impact that this has had ... without compensation ... without resolution ... they ... feel that the Government are waiting for them to die ... for the problem literally to cease to exist.”—[Official Report, House of Commons, 16 May 2024; Vol 750, c 495.]
It is quite clearly no way to treat people. I cannot help but feel that underlying ageism and sexism is playing a role in the Government’s response. It is shameful that no compensation has been put in place—the incoming UK Government must do better. The new UK Government must accept the ombudsman’s findings, acknowledge the maladministration and swiftly set up a fair compensation scheme for the women affected.
17:49
The Scottish Government has been consistent in its calls for the UK Government to immediately right the historic wrong that has been suffered by the WASPI women. I congratulate those campaigners who have relentlessly pursued justice. They should be commended and applauded for their tireless work. I also thank Clare Haughey for securing the debate and for her long-standing campaigning on behalf of the WASPI women.
When the UK Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman report was published in March, we immediately called on the UK Government to take action quickly and compensate the women who were impacted. The report identifies the DWP’s failure to act promptly in writing to the women who were going to be impacted by the changes in state pension age and it calls for compensation to rectify that maladministration.
It is vital that whoever forms the next UK Government delivers the compensation package as soon as possible. They should listen to the WASPI women’s calls for comprehensive compensation and take into account the financial hardship suffered. I am aware that previous debates on the issue have been largely consensual, but I understand the frustrations that have been expressed in the chamber tonight on behalf of the WASPI women.
The PHSO report recommends that the DWP should compensate women born in the 1950s by between £1,000 and £2,950. Although that is welcome, the Government believes that compensation should go further and supports Alan Brown’s bill, which has called on the UK Government to publish a compensation framework for WASPI women set at £3,000 to £10,000 or more. The WASPI campaigners also feel that that would be a fairer outcome, given the wider financial hardship that this devastating policy has caused. We were also pleased to see that Patricia Gibson MP secured a debate on 16 May, resulting in the UK Parliament calling on the Government to deliver prompt compensation to the women who were impacted.
As Marie McNair and Beatrice Wishart have noted, the UK Government unfortunately failed to make a clear commitment to delivering that compensation prior to the dissolution of Parliament, pledging only to consider the PHSO report. That stance is repeated in the Conservative manifesto, and there is no mention of WASPI at all in the Labour manifesto.
Finlay Carson talked about this becoming a political issue, but it is undeniable that the WASPI women feel abandoned. Finlay Carson knows fine well that the state pension is a reserved matter that limits what we can do within a devolved competence as the Scottish Government. It is up to the UK Government to take action on that.
To be clear, the PHSO’s findings and compensation recommendations are that the DWP mishandled the communication of the equalisation of state pension age. As I said, that clearly puts the responsibility squarely at the door of the UK Government to right its own wrongs and compensate the women who were unfairly affected by the maladministration.
Maggie Chapman talked about her continued commitment to put that injustice right. Women are already fighting an uphill battle for pension savings equality without the UK Government making the situation more difficult. The UK has one of the worst gender pension gaps in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, and that is from 2023 statistics. Research by the Pensions Policy Institute found that, for women to retire with the same pension savings as men, they would need to work an extra 19 years. My colleague Ruth Maguire talked about the clear gender issues around the WASPI campaign. Clearly, the equalisation of pension age does not mean pension equality, so it is time to stop letting the women down and take action. Rona Mackay also talked about the WASPI women who have, sadly, passed away without receiving justice, and that cannot continue.
The WASPI campaign has been a long and taxing ordeal for the women involved. The PHSO report is a glimmer of light at the end of a very long tunnel. I hope that the incoming UK Government takes notice of the collective voices of the parties across this Parliament and the UK Parliament, that it pledges to take action on the PHSO report, that it finally acknowledges its maladministration and, importantly, that it does the right thing by providing a fair compensation package at the earliest possible opportunity.
Meeting closed at 17:54.Previous
Decision TimeNext
Correction