Last week Salford City Radio’s Ian Rothwell devoted a whole programme to the CedawinLaw case for mediation to solve the impasse of compensation for the 50swomen who faced a six year delay in getting their pension. Three speakers discussed the issues. Jocelynne Scutt, a former Australian judge and anti discrimination commissioner for Tasmania, gave an update description of the present legal position and how you do not have to court to start a mediation process. Janice Chapman ,a 1950s woman, gives a heart rending account of how women have already been discriminated against before they got their pension and then had to wait six more years before they could get it and how alternatives to work longer are often not possible. I give an interview questioning the wisdom of Waspi’s legal case for partial maladministration and how the All Party Group on State Pension Equality is moving towards insisting that all groups campaign together rather than the division between Waspi and all the other groups which has bedeviled the issue for years.
Lawyers for CEDAWinLAW, the group fighting for equality for all women, have now drawn up papers to take Mel Stride, the work and pensions secretary, to the high court over his failure to agree to any mediation to sort out the seven year running sore over settling the 50swomen pensions issue.
CEDAWinLAW in a statement today said: ” CEDAWinLaw is best pleased to announce that its legal team is about to file an application to the court to commence legal proceedings on our behalf representing all #50swomen against the secretary of state for work and pensions.”
“Without waiving privilege CEDAWinLAW is pleased to say that leading counsel advises that there are grounds to seek permission to launch a full Judicial Review based on an unreasonable refusal to mediate and they are to be pursued on behalf of ALL 1950’s Women.”
The decision follows work by lawyers Edwin Coe and human rights KC John Cooper to draw up a case after their crowdfunder raised enough cash to prepare a legal strategy. The crowdfunder is now raising funds to fight the case in the courts.
The legal challenge will be on behalf of all 3.5 million remaining 50s born women who faced a six year delay before they got their pension with many of them saying they never realised the change was coming.
Mel Stride himself at first tried to ignore any call for mediation by not replying to a request from mediation lawyers Garden Court Chambers which was prepared to act as a mediator. But the request itself triggered a legal process and in the end he replied refusing any mediation.
It has since become known that the DWP in a confidential submission to the Parliamentary Ombudsman, Rob Behrens, has said it has done nothing wrong re maladministration and said to pay any of the women compensation could amount to the ministry facing “a major fraud.” See my blog on thishere.
The case for the women has been strongly articulated by former Australian judge Jocelynne Scutt in her judge’s report on the inequalities they faced.
She said: “The 50s women have the right not to be discriminated against on the ground of age and/or sex. Those rights are enforceable. However those rights have been breached by the failures and actions of the Department of Works and Pensions in the way they failed to notify, and in the way they went ahead to apply the legislation albeit they had failed to notify and therefore the 50s women had no notice of the need to reorganise their retirement plans or their paid work arrangements. “
She has recently recorded a fresh video:
Jocelynne Scutt
John Cooper, KC , who will arguing the court case, said:
“ This is an important challenge for so many #50sWomen in this country. The weight of the evidence indicates a grave injustice to them, and we will robustly represent their interests as we move forward with the assistance of a first class legal team.”.
CEDAWinLAW have notified party leaders, party deputies and committee chairs plus Sir George Howarth’s ADR group about the legal action with the mobilised #50sWomen’s voting bloc also in mind ahead of next year’s General Election.
Ian Byrne MP has agreed to apply for a Back Bench Debate on Mediation and Kim Johnson MP plans to table an Early Day Motion on Mediation.
The petition to Parliament has been updated. See here.
In another development the Parliamentary Ombudsman, Rob Behrens has extended the consultation on his proposals to handle the maladministration report by making no recommendation for compensation but leaving it to Parliament to decide. It will now finish on January 19 rather than by Christmas.
Davina Lloyd interviews Dr Jocelynne Scutt, author of the groundbreaking Judge’s report on the plight of 1950s women who faced a six year delay in getting their pensions
Meanwhile Rob Behrens, the Parliamentary Ombudsman, stalls WASPI on any date they will get his delayed findings
It is well worth watching the above video interview with Dr Jocelynne Scutt which explains clearly and concisely the current impasse over resolving the dispute between 3.5 million 1950s born women and the government over the six year delay in getting their pensions.
She provides both a clear explanation of why an Alternative Dispute Resolution is the only way to solve the impasse and why the Ombudsman’s current draft report – now being rewritten – only provides a partial solution to the problem by concentrating solely on the delay caused by maladministration and not on the direct discrimination against the women themselves under the UN Convention on the Elimination of all Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). The latter is crucial because Mrs Thatcher signed up and ratified this convention in 1986 and the UK is responsible to the UN in Geneva to follow its provisions.
As Dr Scutt argues ” the law is the law”.
Laura Trott MP Pensions Minister Pic credit: Official Portrait, House of Commons
Her explanation comes as the pension minister, Laura Trott, has muddied the waters saying that the offer of mediation by the internationally respected law firm Garden Court Chambers, cannot be taken up at the moment by Mel Stride, the works and pension secretary, because the Parliamentary Ombudsman is still working on his report.
Laura Trott is wrong. Mediation can go ahead while the Parliamentary Ombudsman is still investigating as it is an entirely separate from whatever the Ombudsman recommends. Indeed it might save Rob Behrens a lot of work as he is obviously struggling to put together a fresh report and would probably love to drop this hot potato.
The reason why Laura Trott is offering these lame excuses and why there is silence from Mel Stride, I suspect, is that Garden Court has started a legal process by writing now twice to the Secretary of State and offering to act as impartial mediators to end this dispute. Their reputation as impartial mediators is second to none.
“No reply” Mel Stride, secretary of State for Work and Pensions
He is trying to avoid replying because if he says yes – it will automatically go ahead. But if he says no, his lawyers at the Department for Work and Pensions have probably warned him he risks the whole matter going back to the courts. If that happens what sensible judge is not going to think the Secretary of State is being obstructive. To borrow Cabinet colleague Michael Gove’s words on another matter, he will be portrayed as “a blocker not a builder.”
The dilemma both the government and Parliamentary Ombudsman are facing is what is the position of the UK under CEDAW. If Dr Scutt’s cogent judgement is correct,, they just can’t ignore the implications of direct discrimination for this particular group of people. It is the ” elephant in the room.”
I am grateful to the Waspi Pembrokeshire branch for tweeting about the recent meeting between the Parliamentary Ombudsman and Waspi which ended in a stalemate despite them sending in two lawyers to help argue their case. The Ombudsman could give no publication date when this so called ” urgent” issue could be resolved and talked of completely rewriting the second part of its report because of the issues ” Waspi and others ” had raised.
Rebecca Hilsenrath,chief exec of the Parliamentary Ombudsman’s Office
I suspect the “others” refers to Dr Scutt’s judgement as I know CEDAWinLaw has sent her judgement to the Parliamentary Ombudsman’s chief executive, Rebecca Hilsenrath, and I can’t see how the Ombudsman can produce a report without referring to it. Mrs Hilsenrath has also agreed to meet CEDAWinLAW on a date yet to be agreed.
Again I advise everybody to watch the interview for a clear understanding of the present position taken by CEDAWinLAW as everyone awaits events.
Please donate to Westminster Confidential to allow me to continue my investigations.
Westminster Confidential 