John McDonnell explains the Labour pensions offer to 50swomen over more than tea and sympathy.

John McDonnell with Azhar Ali, Labour candidate for Pendle, explaining the offer to some of the women

For those who are following the fight by all groups to get compensation for 3.8 million women who have waited up to six years for their pensions, here is a detailed video with John McDonnell, the Shadow Chancellor on how he intends to implement the £58 billion package

There are a number of new points revealed in this video.

  1. Labour is looking at offering both a weekly payment and a yearly lump sum depending on whether the women would like it.
  2. The implementation of the plan would begin as soon as Labour enters government.
  3. Labour has already talked to Whitehall civil servants so they can work up the scheme immediately Labour gets into office.
  4. Every woman will get a letter to prevent the previous debacle under successive governments where women did not hear of the offer
  5. He discloses he has talked to Michael Mansfield, the QC, who is drawing up the appeal for BackTo60 who are seeking full restitution to make sure it cannot be legally challenged.
  6. Labour ruled out means testing the offer because they found it would be complicated and expensive to do this and would delay payments. Bad luck economist Frances Coppola your idea wouldn’t work
  7. Yes it would mean Theresa May and Harriet Harman would get payments – but because it is taxable they will have to pay a big chunk back.
  8. Means testing would also break the principle that it is a national insurance based payment – based on entitlement not a benefit.
  9. He reveals the BBC had great difficulty understanding what the deal was about and why he had decided to pay it.
  10. Finally for tech lovers the end of the video he talks about introducing a national free broadband system – citing a small tech company in a rural area which devises new games – but can’t expand because of the poor quality broadband in its area. He points out this will be a boost for business.

75 thoughts on “John McDonnell explains the Labour pensions offer to 50swomen over more than tea and sympathy.

  1. According to their calculator, being born in Nov 1957 means I would only receive a total of £14,711. I only had 4 yrs notice that I would not be entitled to retire at 60 in 2017 but have to wait 6 more years until 2023. This is a loss of £52,603. Do you think this is fair recompense?

    Like

    • But then the 60s born would say the same, and the 70s. It has to end somewhere and it has been implemented to recompense those who really DID have very little notice. It has to taper either side of those who are the first to have to wait until 65 or 66 for their pension. How could they give the same to those 50s born women who retired at 61-62 and therefore only lost out on a year or two’s pension? And at the other end of the scale, my sister, now 59, has had far longer to get used to the idea than someone now 65 and still waiting. It was always going to be compensation for the worst effected and looks fair to me.

      Liked by 3 people

      • I was born in 1957 and only given 4 yrs notice. That is nowhere near enough time to prepare for a sudden hike in retirement.

        Like

      • Jenny I am 66 next July Born in 1954 and should have started to receive my Pension in 2014 but don’t get it until 6th May next year, I only found out in 2014 that I wouldn’t get my Pension till 2020 as that was before the campaigning started. I received no notice at all and wasn’t helped as my Husband passed away aged 60 in December 2013 wsithout receiving any of his Pension, so not only did I lose his money I also lost my Pension and I am disabled too. I do feel sorry for all 50s Ladies, but some are definitely worse off than other by having received no notice at all and none of us have received written notice which is disgusting.
        Lynn

        Liked by 1 person

    • “We owe a moral debt to these women” (J. Corbyn). More pragmatically, these women are owed a financial debt; which disappointingly is not being adequately paid by the compensation scheme prescribed by Labour. As someone already commented, “crumbs” ….. However, the issue is now receiving increased air-time and justification, all to the good moving forward with appeal…..

      Like

    • The money has gone. That’s why Johnson wouldn’t offer to assist! We have to rely on a very thorough audit once Labour are elected to follow nine years of Tory over-expenditure! In truth I’m sure they will have covered their tracks. I do believe our contributions are gone!

      Like

  2. Thank You David and the Labour Party, the only ones who give a damn about what has happened to us 50s Ladies. I just don’t get why people would rather accept nothing at all (unless we win our long awaited appeal) that what Labour are offering, it is madness. I have heard every nasty remark made by all the reporters and interviewers about where the money is coming from and Labour have already said it will be borrowed and I don’t think this is wrong because the money that should have been used to pay us (what we paid in) has been used to pay off debt, so its payback time. Also today it was revealed by the IFS Director Paul Johnson that in fact the Conservatives are likely to end the country up in more debt than Labour. What will we see of the money spent by the Conservative Government? Labour are planning to spend vast amounts, but their plans are to give us back a fit for purpose NHS, more money for education, ending the not fit for purpose Universal Credit, more affordable homes the list is endless. I am glad John McDonnell has done this video and explained a bit more, I know for sure where my vote is going and not just because of our Pension I want the Austerity to come to an end. It would make my Parents and Grandparents turn in their graves, to see how many working people are using food banks, how many people you walk past in the street sleeping rough, how many people who are kept for hours in hospital corridors on trolleys. Once again Thank You David & Thank You Labour.

    Liked by 3 people

  3. I appreciate the recognition and John mcdonnell always speaks intelligently about any subject. However, I strongly disagree with the tapering off after 1955 born women because post 55ers had more notice, more time to prepare. This is not true. 18 months before I was going to retire at 60 and work part time, I asked my colleague who was approaching 60 if she was going part time and she told me we would have to work until 66. Yes, apparently there were groups such as backto60 and waspi but I didn’t seek them out as I ”knew’ I was retiring at 60 and like now, it wasn’t in the media at all and no letter telling me. Labour are the only ones given us any recognition

    Liked by 2 people

    • I agree that it is good that Labour are publicly recognising the wrong that has been done. As a 1961 born woman who has been campaigning with slightly older women (ie 1950s) I also recognise what it is like to be told I can’t have any support or help because “you had more notice, more time to prepare”! That is an added burden for us 1960s to bear as we are often made to felt lonely and isolated even during our fights along with the 1950s born. All because we were born a couple of years after another woman obviously does not mean that a). I knew before her b). and that I therefore had more time to prepare!
      Not much you can do with a pension anyway unless you have 30/40 years notice as they grown w cumulatively…plus you need a well paid job. We are all part of the same story.
      The BBC have been very anti the proposal and Labour’s reps. need to understand and speak up better on the issue. Guess they haven’t had much time to prepare! The age rises as a whole are too much I feel and are all part of privatising pensions. It’s a very valuable industry, hence all the trolls.

      Like

      • I think the assumption is not that you knew before someone a couple of years older than you but that you both learned at the same time – from the same sources presumably. And so therefore you did have longer to prepare, being younger at the time of discovering the increase. Not what you want to hear I know

        Liked by 1 person

  4. I simply don’t believe there will be a voluntary payback for the lost state pensions, from Labour or Conservatives, for once Boris was being honest! I wouldn’t rule out some form of compensation from the courts though which would help remove the current injustice.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. Looks like people born in 1956 and over
    Will get very little or nothing over 5 years
    Due real pension in 3 years does that
    Mean that be affected.

    Like

  6. I’m still not happy with this. I have watched the video and still find it unfair as we are all going to get different amounts also if we vote Labour and they get in we accept the offer. we can no longer appeal the judicial review decision. Which I think we should carry on with as labour are offering a lot less than we are losing or already lost thus far. I appreciate having the offer on the table and it is getting us a lot of media coverage at last which can only help our case. but dont think the offer is good enough also I need to vote for someone (who) I’ve not decided yet.

    Like

  7. For me it won’t make much difference as I will get £6880 which is only one years pension.
    I will have to work for another five years anyway. As I am in a manual job I don’t know how long I can carry on working. My sister who is two years older will get over £20000.
    Seems unfair.
    My husband is already retired and I would like to join him but can’t afford to.

    Like

  8. Thank you Labour Party for being the only party who listened and agreed with us 1950’s women but the offer is not fair to all. I was born may 1958 and can provide proof that the dwp have never made any contact with me, until 2 years before I should have retired (2016) when it was actually ME that applied for my pension forecast and on that forecast letter it just states my retirement date is: 6 May 2024, it does not explain the extra 6 years I have to wait. ( I have also paid maximum NI contributions)
    If another lady whose born in 1955 has paid maximum contributions and also only had 2 years notice of the change is going to get £31,200 how come I don’t get the same, it seems my amount is just under £12,000 we are both still having to wait 6 more years

    Like

    • Hi karen hope this helps you. It’s based on how long you have waited so far the 1955 lady as waited 4 years so far so gets more more than you because 1958 hasn’t been waiting as long.plus it is going to taper off from april 1955 born to 1960born so will get less still. Its a birthday lottery. and not very fair when we have all had 6 years added on. and it will only happen if Corbyn gets in no 10. and then it may not as it is not written in concrete. so theres no guarentees we will get anything.

      Like

  9. As part of #backto60 and our mammoth struggle, thank you labour party. Any funding for us is marvellous, some of us at the very base camp have had an appalling 6 years, trying to survive in a wealthy country, after working for 48 years! The middle class have not suffered as we, nor the housewife supported by another. It is a diverse subject with vast connotations.
    It was deemed that some os never prepared re private pension. I did, forced to cash in to survive and loose at same time, so I figure I’ve lost so much more, maybe we’ll over double our oust an ding state pension. I am a labour voter, continue to work physically hard, can’t do much longer, struggling like mad to July goalpost. One hellish winter to go. The problems seem to spiral from this decision. I having now at last met a partner, cannot bring anything to table!
    Single nursing mother for 40 plus years, long term agency, no childcare, no nhs pension therefore

    Liked by 2 people

  10. Yes Susan I agree with you about the tapering off after 1955 born women, we are still having to wait 6years!!! My payout would be £25 a week which seems grossly unfair.

    Like

    • Not really because you’ll be getting that £25 from when still only what, 62-63 say. Whilst those born 54/55 have had to do with nothing whatsoever until 65 or 66. You’ll have the benefit of that £25 from a younger age to soften the blow of having to wait until 66 for your actual pension. Waiting until 66 with absolutely zilch has had devastating effects on many of those ladies – some haven’t even made it that far…

      Liked by 2 people

  11. Lump sum in arrears.
    Also disgusting Hv to pay tax on it.
    After all in my case list £48k and if had it each yr I would of been under tax threshold.
    It’s great Zjohn talking letters will go out to notify. Labour Liberal ALL had chance to notify and didn’t.
    So really ALL those whose retirement age when they entered workplace should get ALL back ok let’s call this partial payment (it certainly is a compromise) so I think the younger ones 1950’s and 1960’s and possibly 70’s should got some money back.
    In future there needs to be something enshrined in law to say Gov’t have to inform on matters pertaining to their retirement. Let’s face it they love to hold private companies into account

    Like

  12. This plan demonstrates Labour’s understanding of the whole injustice to 50s born women. Its been created in collaboration with Michael Mansfield,Back to 60 and Waspi who all bring together the plight of our generation of women disadvantaged by what was supposed to bring equality to retirement ages for both sexes.
    This gets my seal of approval. Thank you Labour this plan has my vote,as does Jeremy Corbyn on 12/12. Thank you!

    Liked by 2 people

  13. Fabulous, now all we have to do is get you all in Parliament. Weekly would be better for someone like myself, I had breast cancer last year and it’s made me realise how short and precious life is.

    Liked by 2 people

  14. While it’s great to have some political acknowledgement of the situation 1950s women have been left in, I really don’t understand why the amount being offered tapers off so much for those born after 1955. No-one born before 1955 will retire at an older age than 66. None of us had enough notice to prepare effectively for the changes to our SPA and one or two years difference in the amount of notice we were given (if indeed we received any) just does not translate fairly into the severe tapering off in compensation for those born post 1955.

    As I understand it, if this offer is accepted or ratified – I’m not sure by whom – the appeal re the judicial review won’t be allowed and that will be that. I appreciate that we might lose the appeal in any case and also that nothing else is on offer for us at the moment but, like many others, I will have lost £48,000+ in pension payments and will receive far less back. Furthermore, I believe some of those who will receive £31,000+ will not have lost anything like as much as £48,000 as they will have retired at an earlier age and have received their pension from that time.

    It would be great if it can be explained to us why this is fair. I’m old enough to know that sometimes life just isn’t fair, of course, but this seems particularly unfair to those born post-1955 and I’d be grateful if the payment amounts could be revisited bearing in mind the above.

    Of course, Labour has to win the election for any of this to happen…

    PS will we get our #backto60 appeal contributions refunded if the appeal doesn’t go ahead?

    Like

    • Gina
      As far as I am aware the permission to appeal is still going ahead. It probably needs to not just get full restitution but to end the ridiculous position that it allowed the DWP to say it needn’t inform anybody – not just the 50swomen – about the future of their state pension. I have heard nothing to suggest that Labour is demanding that the appeal has to stop for their offer to go ahead. And it looks as though they are open to further discussions on the scheme should they win the election. So there is still a lot to play for.

      Liked by 1 person

      • David I think you have made a mistake here unless I have misread it point 5 says John mcdonnell as spoken to Micheal Mansfield about the back to 60 appeal not being legally challenged. I send many apologies if I have got this wrong.

        Like

      • As I understand it Labour took legal advice from Michael Mansfield about their own proposal to make sure it couldn’t be challenged by men. Probably should have made it clearer. BackTo60 have not been challenged by men in the courts, only by the DWP.

        Like

    • I have to disagree with you on your point about those receiving £31,000 The women who would get that sum are in fact the very first ones, born late 54 to 55 who WILL have to wait until 66 for their pension. It is those born 51-53 who retired earlier and so lost less.

      Like

  15. Agree labour are at least agreeing pensions stolen, glad offer does not mean our appeal has to be withdrawn but happy to think what labour offering is part payment until we cangwt to court (the quicker the better). Also think this is may only be tip of iceberg – when you get your pension & don’t get full amt please make sure that DWP have inckuded all your contributions & credits for when you were looking after children. Have spent last 3 months trying to get answer from DWP why when I had first child & on maternity leave & receiving mat all I did not re3cieve my credits for that year – still waiting for their response already spoken to them three tines but will keep at them-also opting out not fully explained & what impact that this would have .

    Liked by 1 person

  16. I only had 5 years notice and feel it is very unfair that I will only get £11.268 because I was born in 1958, I still have to work until 66 to get my pension.

    Like

  17. Thank you, David. It would help us mere spectators enormously if you could translate all news feeds from all pundits upto 12th December? 😉 Many thanks for your continued support & erudite commentary. 👏👏👏

    Like

  18. I, personally, think Labour offer is the best we are ever likely to get and I would certainly be pleased to receive it.
    Let’s not forget that;
    Labour have to be successful at the election.
    Not all 50s women will be as anxious for their payment for a variety of reasons- maybe they have never worked, have private wealth or supported by (well off) husband/partner and the election vote may be based on their Brexit view.
    Some 50s women are already Labour voters, so the figure of 3.8 million women voting Labour isn’t really accurate-bit like 50,000 nurses!!!
    Also, I am confused why people are angry that Theresa May and Harriet Harman would receive payment under Labour proposal as if SP had been paid at 60 they would have been eligible to claim it- as can rock stars who have billions stashed away.
    I have lost faith in the Judicial system, how can judges have views that are so far apart? Surely they must all follow the same guidelines or is it down to the direction of the wind that day?
    I need help NOW and Labour are trying to help.
    I have had to put my views on Brexit out of the decision and I am basing my decision on me, and only me, which goes against my nature as I have always looked at the bigger picture. I am fed up being poor, cold and hungry. I would love to enjoy my life and my grandchildren before I leave this world. We have been treated appallingly and I am so disappointed with Boris who has used Brexit as a shield for wrongdoing.
    Everyone of us must make a choice and I feel we all get something under Labour and may get nothing if left to Judicial Appeal.
    We should never have been put in this position, but here we are, so ……

    Liked by 1 person

  19. I’ve only just caught up with the Jeremy Vine Radio 2 programme regarding 1950s women (although referred to as Waspis).
    What I think is particularly telling is when Jeremy Vine says that in 1995 in his role as a political journalist he was always around Westminster and can not recall the announcement changing our pension age. He wonders whether it had been ‘buried’ on a busy news day, for example. Well if he didn’t hear about it – and I certainly didn’t receive any letter – how were we meant to know??

    Like

  20. But what about us disabled 1950’s women who are in receipt of ESA? I’m actually receiving more on ESA per week that your comp would give me and that would be deducted penny for penny. Could you not state that there should not be a deduction in this case?
    I live on my own. After I lost my job 3 years ago I realised because of my disability and age I’d never get another. I nearly lost my home, was living in food banks. Had to get help from Stepchange debt help. I really don’t want to go back to that. I am a Labour Party member btw. I will be voting for Jeremy regardless as this election is not just about my pension. It’s about equality and fairness for those less empowered in our society. But I’m afraid women in my position are getting neither from this arrangement. I know you mean well but I think this is something that’s been disastrously overlooked. Thank you. Jeannie Le Mesurier

    Liked by 1 person

    • Jeanne
      Not wanting to pry but it sounds as though you don’t have any savings. If you don’t you are allowed £6000 savings if you are on ESA before they take any money off you. Since Labour plan to pay it at £5200 a year – below the level where you would be affected.

      Like

      • Hi David, I don’t want to sound rude but are you 100% sure? The DWP demand that we declare any income and that is what the money will be. I can’t see them just ignoring it, as I had a rise in my tiny work pension of about two pounds a month a year ago and they are now demanding payback and have issued me with a £50 fine for not telling them (which I had!).

        Like

      • I hope I am right I took it from a guide by http://www.moneysavingexpert.com On Pension credit it said: “There is no upper capital limit for Pension Credit but you may receive a reduced amount if you have more than £10,000 of capital. For every £500 or part of £500 of capital over £10,000, you’ll be treated as having ‘deemed income’ of £1 a week. This is added to any other income you have, such as a pension.”

        Like

      • Hi David,
        Pension credit is only available if you are OVER state pension age. I am 62 and in receipt of a tiny work pension classed as income) with the addition of £51.84 an ESA to top up to the £128.45 the government say I need to live on per week. If the compensation (17, 841 = £68.62 week over 5 years) , is paid weekly they will reduce my ESA by the paid amount, thereby improving my total income by £16.78 a week turning my compensation into just £4362.8 in total!! But what happens if they pay as a lump sum of £3,568per annum for 5? This money won’t be savings, it will be income first and therefore declarable. Therefore the DWP will cut my ESA but what I and other ladies in my position want to know is will they treat it as income in one week or will they split it over the year? I can’t get an answer from anyone! I am going to my Labour surgery to see if they know. Can you see if you can find out what will happen please as you have better contacts than me!

        Like

      • I will see if I can clarify this. I put the pension credit example in because some of the 50s women who have had to wait so long are now over 65 and a half and eligible for a pension.

        Like

  21. I am confused at the negativity towards Labours plan to compensate 50s woman. I am sure most of the 3.5 million of us are completely aware that the conservatives are not going to give, otherwise we wouldn’t be having these conversations as they would have sorted it to our favour years ago. We have all seen the evidence and they have confirmed over and over again they are not for turning and will not relent on the pensions issue. So those of you who are deluded in thinking that your offer will be better need to think carefully about who you give your vote for. Regardless to how much we get from Labour its more than we would get from the conservatives and LIB DEMS. In my opinion, we have the best of both because the appeal is still on-going as well as all the complaints with the Ombudsman. So on polling day please bear in mind that little fish are sweet and I for one would rather have some than nothing at all.

    Like

  22. No disrespect at all intended to Michael Mansfield, but is the man who just lost a court case against the way the government raised women’s state pension age, the right person to give the green light to a policy compensating them when the courts wouldn’t?

    A man born in the 1950s has seen his Pension Credit age increase in line with women’s State Pension Age. It is difficult to see how compensation for one would be appropriate but not the other, if the line is drawn purely on gender.

    Like

  23. It’s good that LABOUR will compensate us, but the way it is tapered it is quite brutal, there is such a big difference for some, when lumbered with 6yrs and thousands of £’s
    apart, but only a small gap in the age difference!!! Surely, it should a bit more even, at the end of the day we have 6yrs added.

    Like

  24. If Labour are so pro pensions groups why did they not direct all of their MP’s to sign the early day motion?

    Their manifest pledge is not set in stone and is tapered based on how long you have had to prepare which is the point we are banging our head against the wall with…..we couldn’t prepare because we had NO notice!

    It’s nothing like what our pension should be and we still have to continue to work so end up paying tax on it, so lose 20 percent and still have to continue to pay NI!

    Yay, we’ll get free broadband!

    Like

    • By any chance have you written as nicely to the Tories who stole your money? Linda and others will continue to have talks with Labour as time moves on. It depends whether they’re successfully voted into government.
      I too am delighted to see free broadband in the Manifesto! Will save at least £40 a month! Very grateful.

      Like

      • Yes, I have written comments regards all political parties until it’s actually seen to be done I don’t trust any politician. With regard to the free broadband, that is something that comes from what we pay in and takes away from other services that are needed more IE they are just about to close a much needed food Bank in my area because of lack of funds to run it and this area is in a labour stronghold……. Priorities in my view would be to ensure people had a roof over their head and food to eat.

        Like

      • High speed internet is a priority across the country providing skills and communications leading to job security for the future- more so if it’s free. Food banks were meant to be a short term help. If there is no one contributing from big companies, billionaires and top earners how can they continue to be run? Tories are responsible for the circumstances in which people are suffering.

        Like

      • So those of you who are turning your noes up at the Labour will be donating any compensation you may receive to charity, as you clearly dont want or need it.

        Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.