I have received letters and emails about the Government’s response to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO) investigation into women’s state pension age and associated issues. Below, I have shared my response to these messages, and set out my position on the Government’s decision.
“Thank you for writing about the Government response to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO) investigation. I am writing to set out my position clearly and honestly although I know what I say might not be popular.
The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions has accepted the Ombudsman’s finding that there was maladministration by successive governments which resulted in a 28-month delay in sending letters on pension changes. This is not acceptable, and people should rightly expect more from their government, whoever is in power. Our government has apologised for this failing and will resume work with the Ombudsman on an Action Plan to improve future communications, so this does not happen again.
On the central issue of compensation, since being elected constituents have asked me what the point is of having an ombudsman report from the PHSO, if we do not listen to it. That is why I have always emphasised that it is the PHSO that found the communications failings did not result in direct financial loss. It was also the PHSO that noted that a flat-rate compensation scheme would cost up to £10.3 billion.
My position is that I cannot, in good conscience, support asking taxpayers to pay £10.3bn for a compensation scheme for an error where the Ombudsman concluded there was no direct financial loss.
As an MP I must weigh the needs of women who did not receive this letter in a timely manner against the pressures on public finances and the needs of younger generations who face higher living costs and will ultimately inherit the bill for any large, unfunded payout. Thinking about where money can be best spent is a responsibility I take seriously. I simply do not believe it is fair to our children and grandchildren to ask them to pay for this.
In the meantime, the government is taking practical measures aimed at supporting the most vulnerable pensioners now, including a firm commitment to the Triple Lock for the whole of this Parliament, a major push to increase Pension Credit take-up, and a record budget settlement for Scotland which I hope the Scottish Government use to reduce waiting lists and improve care for older people. Those are steps that will actually raise incomes and improve health outcomes for many pensioners.
Many will be angry about how the State Pension age for women was changed and even the fact that it was, and I hear those views loud and clear. However, the PHSO investigation was narrowly about communications, not the policy decision to change the pension age itself. Those are separate debates, but I will continue to hold Ministers to account to ensure lessons are learned and future communications are clear and timely.
I know this decision will not satisfy everyone and I suspect my response will anger some. You feel you have been misled in the past and I understand why, so I feel I owe you a direct and clear explanation of my view which I believe to be the right thing even if it is not popular.”
Recent Comments