Are you, or is someone you know, a woman born in the 1950s? If so they may well be one of 700,000 caught in what has been described as a “brutal pensions trap”. By Tony Watts OBE

Former pensions minister Steve Webb recently admitted publicly what many people have been saying for a long time now: the Government got it wrong over raising the state pension age (SPA) for women – at least in the time frame in which they are making it happen.

Pressure is also building within Parliament itself, with a large number of MPs backing a call in the House for the Government to look again at their timing. Mr Cameron, meanwhile does not look like moving on this issue, saying that the Government has already given pensioners more than a fair deal with the “triple lock”.

And while there has been plenty of support policy for the “WASPI” campaign – a steadfast group of people who have been tying to get this issue discussed for some time now – there are (equally) many who claim that men have long had an unfair deal compared to women… this is simply redressing the balance.

So who is right? And will you personally be affected by the changes?

If you haven’t followed this story, the bare bones of it are this. Back in 1995, the decision was made to raise the age at which women could receive a State Pension from 60 to 65, in line with men, by 2020.

In 2011, the Government elected to accelerate this transition to 2018, and also to make it 66 for men and women by 2020.

The changes, of course, have been triggered by increasing longevity as well as equality between the sexes; and, indeed, there will now be built in reviews of the State Pension Age every five years, with the first one timed for May 2017.

That said, one of the most relevant points in the debate in Westminster Hall on 1 February was that, for the first time, we are starting to see life expectancies start to drop off… and that will particularly impact those women who will be most affected by this (living in less affluent areas and often suffering from ill health in their 50s).

So what are the implications for a generation of women caught up in this?

The biggest issues are around how much notice those affected have been given in order to deal with the changes. 1995 was a long time ago; the changes did not receive an awful lot of coverage then; and for anyone then in their 40s, arguably their pension date seemed a long away ahead.

But where the Government singularly failed is in making direct contact with those affected to ensure they really had taken the changes on board. No letters were sent out and the sum total of the Government’s publicity on this appears to have been some advertorials placed in a number of women’s magazines ad newspaper supplements.

When it was asked for details of these adverts the DWP, according to campaigner Paul Lewis, refused to do so. It admitted it “may hold” this information but – finding it would cost more than £600 to dig it out – it was entitled not to provide it.

Anyone who has read The Hitchhikers Gide to the Galaxy, and where the planning application for Earth to be destroyed was lodged, might find this a worrying familiar response. Is such an important issue, the potential cost of which they themselves calculate will run to £30 billion over the next ten years, really not worth spending £600 on?

The other issue is the sudden acceleration of SPA from 65 to 66, giving a large number of women very little opportunity to make any necessary adjustments to their life plans.

The 2011 changes mean that 500,000 women will have to wait an extra year for their state pension, 300,000 women for 18 months or more; while one particularly hard-hit group of 30,000 were to wait for an extra two years.

So when were they told? According to finance expert Paul Lewis, who recently gave evidence in Parliament on this:

• More than one million women born between 6 April 1950 and 5 April 1953 were told at age 58 or 59 that their pension age was rising from 60, in some cases to 63
• More than half a million women born 6 April 1953 to 5 April 1955 were told between the ages of 57 and nearly 59 that their state pension age would be rising to between 63 and 66.
• Some women were told at just 57½ that their pension age would rise from 60 to 66.

Did the Government get it wrong?

The Government has now changed its procedures so that henceforth more notification will be forthcoming, but for those whom the rise in SPA has come as a surprise, that will be no solace.

So did the Government get it wrong? The man who really ought to know is Steve Webb, Pensions Minister at the time. He has conceded that the government made a “bad decision”, and that his department had been badly briefed on the impact of the changes.

Several months after the initial announcement was made, he asked the PM and Chancellor if any of this could be reversed. With potential savings of £30 billion under threat, the one concession (at a cost of £1 billion) was to introduce some transitional protection by capping the maximum increase to 18 months, rather than two years.

Campaigning on behalf of the women at that time was Ros Altmann. Now a poacher turned gamekeeper sitting at Steve Webb’s old desk, she has ruled out any further concessions.

Needless to say, the changes haven’t gone unchallenged, and “WASPI” (Women Against State Pension Inequality) are a very determined group of people seeking transitional compensation, and they have lodged a petition to Parliament asking for this to be debated in the House.

So far we have seen a one sided discussion in the Commons (ie the Tory benches were virtually empty) which led to a 158-0 vote in favour of taking this issue further and – on 1st February – a discussion in Westminster Hall which was not voted on and which (again) saw previous few people speaking against taking some sort of action.

The DWP ministerial team gave this discussion a miss, opting instead to make a statement that morning that any change of plan was out of the question.

A “brutal pensions trap”

Dame Joan Bakewell has been championing their cause. Addressing Ros Altmann, she demanded: “700,000 women are caught in this brutal pensions trap and they are already in their 60s. They had hoped to be drawing their pensions but in some cases, even after 45 qualifying years, they have no pension, no pensioner benefits, often no job because they have been made redundant and no right to claim jobseekers’ allowance – what does the minister suggest they live on?” she asked.

Will further concessions be wrung out of the Government? That will probably depend on how much head of steam the campaign can raise. Meanwhile the newly installed Pensions Minister is facing more criticism for the way the new flat rate pension was sold to the public when it was introduced.

She has conceded that that it was “misrepresented”, not least that one in three retirees will not receive the full amount because of a lack of NI contributions, while Steve Webb has also agreed the way it was sold to the public was over simplified.

So at least there has been some honesty over these issues from the main people concerned – but at the end of the day it’s the Chancellor who will call the shots.

How much do the changes matter?

Not everyone, of course, relies on their State Pension in retirement. But very large numbers do… and for those who find themselves receiving less in their bank account each month than they’d thought – or had the date they receive it pushed back a year or more – these things matter.

For many it will mean trying to get back into the work force – particularly as the amount that many women will be receiving when it does arrive will be nothing like the £150 flat rate pension that was talked about when it was launched. For those whose health, employment options or caring responsibilities rule out a return to work, the future looks increasingly bleak.

You can follow WASPI on Twitter at @WASPI_Campaign or sign their petition at

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/110776

To find out how the FREE Retire Easy Life Plan can help you take control of your finances in later life, click here – https://www.retireeasy.co.uk/why/index – and there are lots more interesting articles and blogs to read here – https://www.retireeasy.co.uk/news/blog

(This article was updated after the 1st February debate)