'They Are Shameless': Labour Ministers Accused Of 'Betrayal' For Refusing To ...

[Nearly Sane]

... Compensate Waspi Women"

Pretty much

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/they-are-shameless-labour-ministers-accused-of-betrayal-for-refusing-to-compensate-waspi-women_uk_6761eb77e4b0cbd652a2be14

[ProfessorDavey]

... Compensate Waspi Women"

Pretty much

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/they-are-shameless-labour-ministers-accused-of-betrayal-for-refusing-to-compensate-waspi-women_uk_6761eb77e4b0cbd652a2be14

I have no time for the Waspi campaign.

These changes were announced in 1995, some 15-20 years before they actually happened. How much time did these people want to make changes, which, of course, might just mean working for a couple of extra years (like men of the same age already had to and everyone now does).

And let's not forget that the reason for the changes in the first place was to correct a grossly discriminatory policy whereby men and women received their pensions at different ages. Good that the government hasn't caved.

[Nearly Sane]

I have no time for the Waspi campaign.

These changes were announced in 1995, some 15-20 years before they actually happened. How much time did these people want to make changes, which, of course, might just mean working for a couple of extra years (like men of the same age already had to and everyone now does).

And let's not forget that the reason for the changes in the first place was to correct a grossly discriminatory policy whereby men and women received their pensions at different ages. Good that the government hasn't caved.

So you are happy that they lied when in opposition?

[ProfessorDavey]

So you are happy that they lied when in opposition?

I am pleased they are doing the right thing in government.

And just to check that it isn't you who is lying - please confirm whether Labour committed to compensating the WASPI women in their 2024 manifesto. I've looked I cannot see any such commitment.

[ProfessorDavey]

So you are happy that they lied when in opposition?

So do you think the WASPI women should be compensated for their failure to pay attention to pension changes that had been announced 15-20 years before they came into effect.

I think that people need to take responsibility for their own retirement planning NS.

[Nearly Sane]

I am pleased they are doing the right thing in government.

And just to check that it isn't you who is lying - please confirm whether Labour committed to compensating the WASPI women in their 2024 manifesto. I've looked I cannot see any such commitment.

But they aren't doing it because they agree with you that they shouldn't be compensated. And that it wasn't in their manifesto doesn't mean that they didn't have their pictures taken showing support for the compensation. So you're now suggesting that they were either incompetent in doing that and leading on the campaigners, or lying. Why do you think that's acceptable for a political party?

[Nearly Sane]

So do you think the WASPI women should be compensated for their failure to pay attention to pension changes that had been announced 15-20 years before they came into effect.

I think that people need to take responsibility for their own retirement planning NS.

And yet the ombudsman disagreed that they were aware. Are you suggesting the campaigners that the Starmer supported in deed, and still does in word, are stupid?

[ProfessorDavey]

And yet the ombudsman disagreed that they were aware.

But the public ombudsman has no legal powers to compel the government to comply with its recommendations. The government has the right to choose to ignore the ombudsman's ruling as it has in this case, not least because it needs to consider the wider public interest in spending up to £10billion of public money on compensation. The government has decided not to do this, and good on them.

If the WASPI campaigners don't like it that the government has chosen not to comply with a non-legally binding ruling by the ombudsman then they can look to get a legally binding ruling in the courts. Oh, I forgot they have already challenged this in the courts (well I didn't forget, but did note that you failed to mentioned this) ... and they lost. The court ruled that there was no case for compensation and I believe also ruled that the DWP did not have an obligation to write to all potentially impacted people individually.

Oh and something else you have forgotten NS - which is to answer my question - Do you think the WASPI women should be compensated for their failure to pay attention to pension changes that had been announced 15-20 years before they came into effect?

[Nearly Sane]

But the public ombudsman has no legal powers to compel the government to comply with its recommendations. The government has the right to choose not to ignore the ombudsman's ruling as it has in this case, not least because it needs to consider the wider public interest in spending up to £10billion of public money on compensation. The government has decided not to do this, and good on them.

If the WASPI campaigner don't like it that the government has chosen not to comply with a non-legally binding ruling by the ombudsman then they can look to get a legally binding ruling in the courts. Oh, I forgot they have already challenged this in the courts (well I didn't, but did note that you failed to mentioned this) ... and they lost. The court ruled that there was no case for compensation and I believe also ruled that the DWP did not have an obligation to write to all potentially impacted people individually.

Oh and something else you have forgotten NS - which is to answer my question - Do you think the WASPI women should be compensated for their failure to pay attention to pension changes that had been announced 15-20 years before they came into effect?

Who said the ombudsman had that power?

[ProfessorDavey]

Who said the ombudsman had that power?

The point is that the ombudsman (or rather the public one) doesn't have that power, the courts do. So why did you only mention the non-binding ruling of the ombudsman rather than the far more significant (legally biding) ruling of the courts. Where the campaigners lost the case ... and took it to appeal, and lost again.

Noting again that you've failed to answer my question.

Anticipating more diversionary non-sense from NS as he squirms and squirms to try to avoid answering a clear and direct question.

[Nearly Sane]

The point is that the ombudsman (or rather the public one) doesn't have that power, the courts do. So why did you only mention the non-binding ruling of the ombudsman rather than the far more significant (legally biding) ruling of the courts. Where the campaigners lost the case ... and took it to appeal, and lost again.

Noting again that you've failed to answer my question.

Anticipating more diversionary non-sense from NS as he squirms and squirms to try to avoid answering a clear and direct question.

So your strawman that the ombudsman had that power, or anyone claimed they did, you now retract. Good.

[ProfessorDavey]

So your strawman that the ombudsman had that power, or anyone claimed they did, you now retract. Good.

As anticipated (see above)

Still waiting NS.

[Nearly Sane]

As anticipated (see above)

Still waiting NS.

Oh look you want to fellate your strawman

[ProfessorDavey]

Oh look you want to fellate your strawman

Yet more diversionary non-sense.

Still waiting NS.

[Nearly Sane]

Yet more diversionary non-sense.

Still waiting NS.

For what? And why would that excuse your strawman?

[ProfessorDavey]

For what?

For you to answer my question, as you well know. Just in case you've forgotten what it was - here it is again:

Do you think the WASPI women should be compensated for their failure to pay attention to pension changes that had been announced 15-20 years before they came into effect?

[Nearly Sane]

For you to answer my question, as you well know. Just in case you've forgotten what it was - here it is again:

Do you think the WASPI women should be compensated for their failure to pay attention to pension changes that had been announced 15-20 years before they came into effect?

So I think as the ombudsman did, and I have already covered, is that it wasn't communicated clearly. And Starmer agrees with that, and campaigned on it. So you either think he's lying or is stupid? Which is it? I've asked a lot through this thread but you haven't answered   

[ProfessorDavey]

So I think as the ombudsman did, and I have already covered, is that it wasn't communicated clearly. And Starmef agrees with that, and campaigned on it. So you either think he's lying or is stupid? Which is it? I've asked a lot through this thread but you haven't answered

More diversionary non-sense NS.

I asked whether you thought the WASPI women should be compensated - you've still failed to answer the question.

[Nearly Sane]

More diversionary non-sense NS.

I asked whether you thought the WASPI women should be compensated - you've still failed to answer the question.

Are you incapable of reading? As much as you are incapable of answering, it would appear.

[ProfessorDavey]

Are you incapable of reading?

I am perfectly capable of reading NS - and in reading your comments I note that you have still failed to answer whether the question as to whether you think the WASPI women should be compensated

Just to help you - here is a simple form of words that you might want to use to answer the question one way or the other:

a) Yes, I think that the WASPI women should be compensated.
b) No, I do not think that the WASPI women should be compensated.

[Nearly Sane]

I am perfectly capable of reading NS - and in reading your comments I note that you have still failed to answer whether the WASPI women should be compensated

Just to help you - here is a simple form of words that you might want to use to answer the question one way or the other:

a) Yes, I think that the WASPI women should be compensated.
b) No, I do not think that the WASPI women should be compensated.

So when the ombudsman talked about being compensated why didn't Labour say it was wrong? And why do you support them either lying on it?

[Aruntraveller]

Oh come on Prof D. Yu cannot stand holding placards supporting WASPI and then do a volte-face and expect no comeback.

It's tawdry and disingenuous and it is not what I voted for.

Frankly, I am disgusted (but not of Tunbridge Wells).

[ProfessorDavey]

So when the ombudsman talked about being compensated why didn't Labour say it was wrong? And why do you support them either lying on it?

Still not answering the question I see NS.

[Nearly Sane]

Still not answering the question I see NS.

Still sucking up that straw, Prof

[Nearly Sane]

Oh come on Prof D. Yu cannot stand holding placards supporting WASPI and then do a volte-face and expect no comeback.

It's tawdry and disingenuous and it is not what I voted for.

Frankly, I am disgusted (but not of Tunbridge Wells).

Oh the Prof can because he loves hypocrisy