Afternoon summary
The Conservative candidate for the Greater Manchester mayoral election has defected to Richard Tice’s rightwing Reform UK party. Explaining why he defected in an interview with the PM programme, Dan Barker said:
I switched to Reform UK because I thought the Conservatives were not serious about the election against Andy Burnham, they’ve given up on Greater Manchester and, I would argue, the north of England as well, and the policies in Westminster are no longer what I would call conservatism either.
So when I look at Reform UK, and look at their policies, and the people and the things they say, I see that as true conservatism.
Barker also said “it is clear that the Conservative party have lost the confidence of ordinary working people across the UK and there is a reckoning waiting for them at the general election.”
Updated
Vaughan Gething, the new Welsh first minister, has appointed his cabinet. The full details are here. Gething says his new team “will answer the call of the generation in waiting, to create a stronger, fairer, greener Wales”.
Today is a significant day for Wales.@PrifWeinidog Vaughan Gething has appointed his new Cabinet, who will work together to deliver a stronger, fairer, greener Wales.
— Welsh Government (@WelshGovernment) March 21, 2024
Full details of appointments here 👇https://t.co/bo6Uu13ENo pic.twitter.com/kNVlpmLKOL
Food insecurity rising, DWP figures show
Food insecurity – a measure of how often families have difficulty having enough food to eat, or enough healthy food – has been rising, today’s family resources report from the DWP says.
Here is the chart.
And the report says:
The proportion of food-secure households decreased from 92% in 2019 to 2020, to 90% in 2022 to 2023, a decrease of two percentage points. This is the lowest proportion of food-secure households since the introduction of household food security to the FRS in 2019 to 2020. In previous survey years, the proportion of food-secure households has been broadly stable.
Despite a decrease in household food security this survey year, the majority of households are still food secure with high household food security (83%) or marginal household food security (7%). Food-insecure households are still in the minority, with low household food security (5%) or very low household food security (5%).
Geographically, there were differences in household food security. Northern Ireland was the most food secure (86% high, 5% marginal), Scotland was least food secure (82% high, 6% marginal).
The Liberal Democrats have also urged the government to pay compensation to the Waspi women. This is from Wendy Chamberlain, the Lib Dem chief whip.
After years of waiting, the ombudsman has finally recommended compensation for Waspi women.
These courageous women, who have tirelessly campaigned for justice after being left out of pocket, deserve our admiration for their persistence.
Liberal Democrats have long supported Waspi in their campaign and it is now up to this Conservative government to come forward with a plan to get these women the compensation they are owed.
Like the SNP (see 5.03pm), the Liberal Democrats are unlikely to be in government at Westminster after the election. The potential cost of Waspi compensation would be a huge headache for any chancellor, and Labour, like the government, has not so far made a commitment to paying compensation.
SNP says government should apologise to Waspi women and pay compensation swiftly
The SNP has been prominent in calling for Waspi women to receive compensation. This is what Kirsten Oswald, the party’s women and equalities spokesperson, said about the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman’s report.
Women born in the 1950s have been betrayed by the Tory government and deprived of pensions they were entitled to.
This saga has run on for far too long – it’s time for the UK government to step up and put an end to this serious injustice by issuing an immediate apology and fair and fast compensation to all women who were affected.
The state pension is a reserved matter. The Westminster government is responsible for women not be properly informed about their pension age rising, and the cost of any compensation scheme would also have to be paid by the Westminster government.
Income inequality up slightly over past year, DWP figures show
The government poverty figures out today included two measures used by statisticians to measure inequality. Both show it going up slightly over the past year (from 2021-22 to 2022-23).
The Gini coefficient is a measure of inequality, between 0% and 100% where 0% would mean everything being shared equally and 100% would mean one person having everything. Here are the figures for income inequality, where there has been a small rise, on both the before housing costs measure and the after housing costs one.
The DWP says since 2011 the Gini coefficient has been “broadly stable”.
Another measure is the 90:10 ratio. This measures the gap between the average income in the top 20% and the average in the bottom 20% (what the higher one is as a proportion of the lower one). The higher the number, the bigger the gap. It has been going up, with or without housing costs included, although, on both measures, the figures are lower than in 2019-20.
Government won't be able to refuse paying some compensation to Waspi women in election year, former pensions minister says
Steve Webb, a Liberal Democrat who served as a pensions minister in the coalition government, has told the BBC that he thinks the government will have to offer some sort of compenstion to the Waspi women. He said:
The ombudsman says he thinks the DWP will refuse this.
My view is that they will never hold that line.
In an election year, parliament I just don’t think will vote for nothing to be done. So I think we will end up with some form of rough justice, I would guess in that £1,000 to £3,000 range that the ombudsman has recommended. (See 11.19am.)
Because if parliament has an ombudsman who spends years meticulously going through all of this, the government should accept that. They shouldn’t refuse.
Today’s poverty figures aren’t good news for the government (see 10.39am, 12.56pm and 1.27pm), but the Department for Work and Pensions has been able to extract some positive findings.
It says “there are 1.1m fewer people in absolute poverty after housing costs than there were in 2010, including 100,000 children, 200,000 pensioners, and 700,000 working aged adults.”
(That is a less impressive statistic than it sounds, because the absolute poverty measure is what counted as relative poverty in 2010, and so over time in a growing economy it should be falling. That is why it is the government’s preferred measure, as the Joseph Rowntree Foundation says. See 1.27pm.)
The DWP also says that in the past year the number of families where someone is disabled that are in absolute poverty, after housing costs, has fallen by 100,000.
Commenting on today’s figure, Mel Stride, the work and pensions secretary, said:
I know the last few years have been tough, with the aftershocks of Covid and the war of Ukraine driving up inflation and cost of living pressures. That’s exactly why we stepped in with the biggest cost of living package in Europe, worth an average of £3,800 per household, and this unprecedented support prevented 1.3 million people from falling into poverty in 2022/23.
Our decisive action to more than halve inflation has allowed us to deliver tax cuts worth an average £900 a year – putting more money directly in the pockets of hardworking families. On top of this, we’re bringing in the biggest ever rise to the national living wage, so more people can achieve long-term financial security through work.
Updated
George Osborne says Sunak should announce date for autumn election now, claiming that might quell leadership speculation
George Osborne, the former Conservative chancellor, has said that Rishi Sunak should announce the date of an autumn election now. Speaking on his Political Currency podcast, which he co-hosts with Ed Balls, the former shadow chancellor, Osborne said:
I would say today: ‘I’ll tell you when the general election is going to be, it’s going to be on this date.’ That ends all the speculation about early elections. It means you don’t go through the whole summer [with people asking] is it going to be October or November?
The marginal advantage [Rishi Sunak] is going to get by having a bit of a surprise that it’s late October or mid November or early December is more than outweighed by the endless speculation.
When Balls asked if he thought such a move would kill leadership speculation, Osborne replied:
Yes, it probably does. It’s a return to something I was involved in which was the Fixed-term Parliament Act, which the Tories were thrilled to get rid of, but I can tell you, it would be wonderful for the Tory party if the Fixed-term Parliament Act had been kept on the statute book and they hadn’t got rid of it. Because then Rishi Sunak would be able to say, ‘Look, I’ll tell you when the general election is going to be, it’s going to be in January 2025.’ [He should] fix the date now, end the speculation, forestall any leadership contest – and you’re back in charge of events.
Reform UK drops second parliamentary candidate in two days over extremist views
Reform UK has dropped a second parliamentary candidate for having extremist views. After Hope Not Hate, which campaigns against racism and fascism, published a report about Benjamin “Beau” Dade, who has called for mass deportations and the removal of “the foreign plague”, Reform UK said he was no longer a candidate for the party in South Swindon. “When this was brought to our attention we acted,” a party spokesperson said.
Yesterday Reform UK axed its candidate in Rutland and Stamford over racist views posed on X.
In relation to the story at 12.13pm, a reader asks:
Will the Tories be able to replace their mayoral candidate in Manchester before the vote?
Yes. Nominations have not even opened yet.
Peers reject claims they are to blame for Rwanda bill not becoming law before Easter
Peers have angrily rejected claims that they are to blame for the government not being able to pass its Rwanda bill before Easter, PA Media reports. PA says:
The House of Lords inflicted seven defeats on the government over its safety of Rwanda (asylum and immigration) bill last night, including a bid to restore the power of the courts to intervene in removals to Rwanda.
Peers have said the government initially scheduled for MPs to respond to Lords amendments early next week, which would have allowed time for the “ping pong” process – when the bill shuttles between the Commons and the Lords until agreement is reached – to conclude before the Easter recess.
However, the government has confirmed the government will not debate the bill again until the Commons returns on Monday 15 April, after the Easter recess.
In the Lords today Lord Forsyth of Drumlean, a former Conservative cabinet minister, asked: “Has the minister seen the reports in The Times and Telegraph, and other newspapers, suggesting that this House has delayed the passage of the Rwanda bill unnecessarily, resulting in people being exposed to the dangers of the Channel?
“Will he take this opportunity to point out that this house was well prepared to pass the legislation back for consideration in the House of Commons before Easter and it is no fault of this house that the legislation has been delayed? And that this house has just been doing its job, which is asking the Commons to think again, and is not responsible for delaying the legislation?”
Vocal support was heard from across the house as peers shouted “hear hear”.
Home Office minister Lord Sharpe of Epsom said: “I’m happy to reassure him that I have seen those reports and I can also reassure him that I passed that very message back before those newspapers published those reports.”
When Rishi Sunak announced plans for the Rwanda bill last year, as a response to a supreme court ruling saying Rwanda was not a safe country, he described it as “emergency legislation”.
But at the No 10 lobby briefing this morning the PM’s spokesperson was reluctant to use the same phrase. Instead he described it as legislation “dealing with a migration emergency”.
The term emergency legislation is usually applied to bills rushed through parliament at speed. Ministers know that, after a few rounds of “ping pong”, the Lords will back down and the government could easily have scheduled these debates so as to conclude this process before Easter.
Ministers have refused to explain why they are delaying. But the new timetable means the bill will get royal assent about two weeks before the local elections, and the first flight to Rwanda may leave in the weeks after the local elections, when likely Tory losses mean Rishi Sunak will be in need of as much “good news” as he can get.
DCMS names expert panel to consider future funding model for BBC, including commercial options
A review into how the BBC is funded will look at whether the corporation should have some fully commercial services, PA Media reports. PA says:
The Department for Media, Culture and Sport (DCMS) has announced appointments to the expert panel, which will provide recommendations to the government on if the licence fee is “sustainable”.
The group includes former chairman of ITV Sir Peter Bazalgette, former broadcast journalist and ex-director of communications at Downing Street Amber de Botton, and David Elstein, a former Channel 5 and BSkyB executive and ex-chairman of media site openDemocracy.
Under the BBC Funding Model Review’s terms of reference, they will consider what corporation services could become fully commercial and how much business revenue the broadcaster could generate.
Culture Secretary Lucy Frazer, who will be chairwoman of the panel’s meetings with media minister Julia Lopez, said: “The BBC has a unique role in public life and fulfils an important service in projecting and promoting our values and culture at home and around the world. We want to see it thrive for generations to come. But in an evolving media landscape, with increased pressure on licence fee payers, it’s right that we take a look at whether the current funding model is fit for the future.”
As the terms of reference published today confirm, one of the questions the panel will consider is “whether the BBC should provide more services to audiences on a fully commercial basis, and what those services could be.”
Updated
Support for the Conservative party is now as low as it was at the lowest point of Liz Truss’s premiership, according to YouGov polling.
The Tory vote share has now fallen to the same level as lowest point under Liz Truss, while Reform UK reach their highest score to date
— YouGov (@YouGov) March 21, 2024
Con: 19% (-1 from 12-13 Mar)
Lab: 44% (=)
Reform UK: 15% (+1)
Lib Dem: 9% (=)
Green: 8% (+1)
SNP: 3% (=)https://t.co/ttUyRxRZND pic.twitter.com/nR8mr6fx57
Labour says yesterday's record 514 small boat arrivals outnumber people 'Tories plan to send to Rwanda in year'
Labour has said that the latest small boat arrival figures, showing 514 people crossing the Channel on Wednesday, the highest daily total for 2024, illustrate why the Rwanda policy will not work.
Until yesterday the highest daily total for this year was the 401 – the number who arrived in the UK on small boats on 4 March.
Yvette Cooper, the shadow home secretary, said:
More people crossed the Channel in a single day yesterday than the Tories plan to send to Rwanda in a year - yet their Rwanda scheme will cost the taxpayer a staggering half a billion pounds. It shows Rishi Sunak’s entire approach is just about gimmicks and headlines instead of getting a proper grip.
Over 500 people arrived in small boats yesterday alone, yet ministers have admitted they will only be sending a few hundred people to Rwanda. The Tories have let criminal gangs take hold along the Channel undermining our border security and putting lives at risk.
Labour says the total number of small boat arrivals this year stands at 4,043, compared to 3,683 over the same period in 2023 and 3,229 in 2022. It says that last year the milestone of 4,000 arrivals was not reached until 5 April.
The government has not said exactly many people it will send to Rwanda this year, once the government safety of Rwanda (asylum and immigration) bill passes and once remaining legal hurdles are cleared, but the expectation is that at best the number for 2024 would be in the low hundreds.
Esther McVey claims expenses to rent flat while husband lets out nearby home
Esther McVey, a minister who has criticised Whitehall waste, has claimed tens of thousands of pounds in expenses to rent a London flat despite her husband owning a property a mile away, Eleni Courea reports.
The Department for Work and Pensions has issued its response to the Waspi women report, echoing the relatively negative line taken by No 10 earlier. (See 12.36pm.) A DWP spokesperson said:
We will consider the ombudsman’s report and respond in due course, having co-operated fully throughout this investigation.
The government has always been committed to supporting all pensioners in a sustainable way that gives them a dignified retirement, whilst also being fair to them and taxpayers.
The state pension is the foundation of income in retirement and will remain so as we deliver a further 8.5% rise in April which will increase the state pension for 12 million pensioners by £900.
Number of people living in absolute poverty rises for 2nd year in row, to 600,000, DWP figures show
Another analysis of today’s DWP poverty figures, from the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, has focused on a different finding. The JRF says there are now 600,000 people living in absolute poverty, half of whom are children. This is the second year in a row absolute poverty has risen.
As explained earlier, relative poverty is defined as having a household income below 60% of the median for that year. Absolute poverty is defined as having a household income below 60% of what the median was in a baseline year (normally when a government took office, so 2010-11 for these figures), adjusted for inflation.
Welfare experts tend to view the relative poverty figures as the most important ones, because they are a guide to current levels of inequality.
But government politicians tend to prefer quoting absolute poverty figures because, in a growing economy, they should naturally fall over time. At PMQs Rishi Sunak often says poverty has fallen since 2010, and when he does, he is talking about the absolute poverty measure.
JRF says the rise in absolute poverty is the joint highest annual increase on this measure for 40 years, matched only by the increase between 2010-11 and 2011-12.
Taking into account the previous year’s increase in absolute poverty numbers, there are now 900,000 more people are living in absolute poverty than there were in 2020-21, 400,000 of whom are children. (This is based on the most recent figures, which cover cover 2022-23.)
Peter Matejic, chief analyst at the JRF, said:
The annual poverty figures published today confirm that the government failed to protect the most vulnerable from the cost of living crisis. Absolute poverty, the government’s preferred measure of poverty, has risen for the second year in a row. This is as big as we have seen for 40 years.
Although the number of children in relative poverty has risen year on year by 100,000 (see 10.39am), the overall number of people living in relative poverty has fallen by 100,000. Matejic said that was “largely due to the incomes of middle-income households falling, rather than people on the lowest incomes being better off”. He added: “This is also likely to reverse now that earnings are growing faster than inflation.”
Number of children living in 'deep poverty' up by 600,000 since 2010, DWP figures show
The Child Poverty Action Group has issued its anaysis of and reaction to the DWP poverty figures out today. (See 10.39am.) Like Save the Children, CPAG reckons the key statistic is the one showing the number of children living in relative poverty has risen by 100,000. It says this means 4.3 million children (or 30% of all children in the UK) are living in relative poverty, up from 3.6 million 2010-11.
Here are some of the other figures CPAG is highlighting.
-69% of poor children live in working families
-46% of children in families with 3 or more children are in poverty, up from 36% in 2011/12
-Poor families have fallen deeper into poverty: 2.9 million children were in deep poverty (ie, with a household income below 50% of after-housing-costs equivalised median income), 600,000 more than in 2010/11
-36% of all children in poverty were in families with a youngest child aged under five
-47% of children in Asian and British Asian families are in poverty, 51% of children in Black/African/Caribbean and Black British families, and 24% of children in White families
-44% of children in lone parent families were in poverty
-34% of children living in families where someone has a disability were in poverty
Relative poverty is defined as having a household income below 60% of the median for that year. Absolute poverty is defined as having a household income below 60% of what the median was in a baseline year (normally when a government took office, so 2010-11 for these figures), adjusted for inflation. Politicians like quoting the absolute poverty figures because, in a growing economy, they should over time be falling.
Alison Garnham, the CPAG chief executive, said:
In a general election year, nothing should be more important to our political leaders than making things better for the country’s poorest kids.
But child poverty has reached a record high, with 4.3million kids now facing cold homes and empty tummies.
We know that change is possible but we need to see a commitment from all parties to scrap the two child limit and increase child benefits.
Updated
No 10 says it will consider Waspi women report, but does not give commitment to paying compensation
Downing Street has not said it will commit to a compensation scheme for Waspi women. At the No 10 lobby briefing this morning, the PM’s spokesperson said the government would need time to consider the report from the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman, but he did not say anything to suggest it was minded to accept the PHSO’s main recommendation (although he did not categorically rule it out either).
This is not a surprise. The PHSO report says: “What DWP has told us during this investigation leads us to strongly doubt it will provide a remedy [ie compensation].”
Asked if the government would pay compensation, the PM’s spokesperson said:
This report has only just been published. The government will now consider the ombudsman’s report and respond to their recommendations formally in due course, and we will of course cooperate with the parliamentary process, as we have done with the ombudsman.
More broadly, we’ve been committed to supporting pensioners in a way that provides them with a sustainable retirement whilst also balancing fairness to them and taxpayers. For example we’ve maintained our commitment to the triple lock.
Updated
Tory candidate in Greater Manchester mayoral contest defects to Reform UK
Dan Barker, who was the Conservative candidate for in the Greater Manchester mayoral election in May, has defected to Reform UK.
Barker, from Sale, was only selected as the Tory candidate to challenge Andy Burham in December 2023.
In a post on X Barker claimed Reform UK is the party that represents ordinary people.
Delighted to be joining the new home of conservatism with Reform UK. Reform represent the ordinary people of this country.@reformparty_uk pic.twitter.com/OrurnTcVy7
— DanBarker4GM (@DanBarker4GM) March 21, 2024
Delighted to be joining the new home of conservatism with Reform UK. Reform represent the ordinary people of this country
MPs from the all-party parliamentary group on state pension inequality for women have backed the Waspi campaign group in saying compensation payments should be worth at least £10,000. (See 11.49am.)
Peter Aldous, a Conservative MP and a vice-chair of the group, said:
These millions of women worked, cared for families, and supported communities all their lives. They deserve the dignity of fast compensation.
In line with the report submitted by the state pension inequality for women APPG to the PHSO in 2022, compensation in line with category 6 injustice must be agreed by parliament. The campaign for justice for 1950s women goes on until parliament reaches the right conclusion.
And Rebecca Long-Bailey, a Labour MP and another vice-chair of the APPG, said:
The UK government must right this historic wrong, and go beyond the recommendations of the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman and deliver fair compensation to these women as a matter of urgency.
Long-Bailey was shadow business secretary in 2019 when Labour, under Jeremy Corbyn, proposed a £58bn compensation package for Waspi women during the 2019 election.
Mel Stride, the work and pensions secretary, is likely to make a statement to MPs about the PHSO’s report into Waspi women next week, Penny Mordaunt, the leader of the Commons, told MPs this morning.
After Labour’s Justin Madders said Stride should come to the Commons tomorrow to respond, Mordaunt said there would not be many MPs in the parliament tomorrow and so a statement next week was more likely.
Waspi campaign leader says it is 'unbelievable' DWP is resisting paying compensation
Angela Madden, who chairs Women Against State Pension Inequality (Waspi), the group campaigning on behalf of women who lost out because the rise in their state pension age was not properly communicated to them, has said it is “unbelievable” the Department for Work and Pensions is resisting paying compensation.
In a statement about the report from the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (see 10.51am), Madden said:
The DWP’s refusal to accept the clear conclusions of this five-year-long investigation is simply unbelievable. One of the affected women is dying every 13 minutes, and we just cannot afford to wait any longer.
Now that the PHSO findings have at last been published, all parties owe it to the women affected to make a clear and unambiguous commitment to compensation.
The ombudsman has put the ball firmly in parliament’s court and it is now for MPs to do justice to all the 3.6 million women affected.
The report at least finds that level 4 compensation is required, but politicians across party lines have previously supported level 6 – which would far more clearly and reasonably recognises the injustice and loss of opportunities suffered.
We are now looking to those who have supported us over the years to put their money with their mouth is and back us on a proper compensation package. All the parties are now in the spotlight with Waspi women watching and waiting to see how they should best use their votes in the coming general election.
Level 6 compensation would mean payments worth £10,000 or more, in recognition of “a profound, devastating or irreversible injustice where the person has been affected permanently”. The PHSO is recommending level 4 compensation. See 11.19am.
Average council tax bills in England to rise by £106, government figures show
The average annual council tax bill in England will rise by £106 this year as local authorities seek to maximise revenue to pay for struggling frontline services, PA Media reports. PA says:
The bill for an average Band D property will increase by 5% to £2,171, with all of the 153 upper-tier councils applying some or all of the social care precept of 2%, according to statistics released by the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities.
This means the overall council requirement in England is £41.2bn, an increase of £2.5bn on 2023/24, while average annual bills have risen by 20% since 2020/21.
There is regional variation in average council tax bills which include social care and parish precepts.
In London the average annual bill for a Band D property will be £1,422, an increase of 5% on 2023/24.
Metropolitan districts outside London will see an average annual increase of 5.4% to £1,837, while bills in unitary counties with no districts will rise 5% to £1,886.
Meanwhile, the average bill in other county areas will increase by 5% to £1,643, with districts in these areas adding an additional £266.
Annual council tax increases remained below 1% between 2010 and 2015, but rose to 5% for the first time in 2018/19.
Fair compensation scheme for Waspi women would cost between £3.5bn and £10.5bn, watchdog says
The PHSO report (see 10.51am) says that Waspi women entitled to compensation should be paid compensation “at level 4 of the scale”.
That means a payment of between £1,000 and £2,950, and is intended to compensate for “a significant and/or lasting injustice that has, to some extent, affected someone’s ability to live a relatively normal life”.
And this is what the report says about how a compensation scheme could be set up.
As a matter of principle, redress should reflect individual impact. But the numbers of people who have potentially suffered injustice because of the maladministration, the need for remedy to be delivered without delay, and the cost and administrative burden of assessing potentially millions of individual women’s circumstances may indicate the need for a more standardised approach. HM Treasury’s ‘Managing Public Money’ requires compensation schemes to be efficient, effective and deliver value for money. It also says the administrative costs associated with compensation schemes should not be excessive.
Parliament may want to consider a mechanism for assessing individual claims of injustice. Or it may consider a flat-rate payment would deliver more efficient resolution, recognising that will inevitably mean some women being paid more or less compensation than they otherwise would.
We recognise the very significant cost to taxpayers of compensating all women affected by DWP’s maladministration. Compensating all women born in the 1950s at the level 4 range would involve spending between around £3.5bn and £10.5bn of public funds, though we understand not all of them will have suffered injustice. Our Principles for Remedy acknowledge that public bodies need to balance responding appropriately to people’s complaints and acting proportionately within available resources. But they also say finite resources should not be used as an excuse for failing to provide a fair remedy.
Updated
Summary of main findings in PHSO report on Waspi women
The PHSO report (see 10.51am) does not seem to be available online yet, but here are extracts from the passage in the report summarising its findings.
On the DWP’s failure to tell women properly about the planned rise in the state pension age for women
We find that timely and accurate information was available about changes to the number of qualifying years needed for a full State Pension as a result of the 2014 Pensions Act and the introduction of the new State Pension. This includes information about how someone’s individual National Insurance record links to how much State Pension they can claim once they reach State Pension age. Research showed the majority of people knew about reforms to the State Pension brought about by the 2014 Act.
However, research also showed that too many people did not understand their own situations and how the new State Pension affected them personally. The gap between awareness and understanding was highlighted by the Work and Pensions Committee and the National Audit Office. DWP did not adequately use this research and feedback to improve its service and performance. In this respect, DWP did not demonstrate principles of good administration. That was maladministration.
On how DWP handled complaints
We find that some aspects of DWP’s complaint handling reflected applicable standards, including that information about how to complain was easily available and that it took a proportionate approach to similar complaints. But DWP did not adequately investigate or respond to the complaints it was considering or avoid unnecessary delay. In these respects, DWP did not demonstrate principles of good complaint handling. That was also maladministration.
On how the independent case examiner (who handles complaints not resolved by the DWP) handled the matter
We find that ICE’s complaint handling reflected applicable standards and guidance. ICE acted within the scope of its remit, which is set out in its contract with DWP. We note, however, our view that the contract meant ICE could not address complainants’ key concern that they did not have as much personal notice of changes to their State Pension age as they should have. 11. We do not consider there was sufficient evidence available for ICE to conclude that DWP had written to individual complainants who said they had never received a letter about their State Pension age. We do not, however, consider this shortcoming means there was maladministration in its complaint handling overall.
On the injustice suffered
We find that maladministration in DWP’s communication about the 1995 Pensions Act resulted in complainants losing opportunities to make informed decisions about some things and to do some things differently, and diminished their sense of personal autonomy and financial control. We do not find that it resulted in them suffering direct financial loss.
We find that maladministration in DWP’s communication about National Insurance qualifying years did not lead to an injustice for the sample complainants.
Before 2016, people built up ‘qualifying years’ towards a Basic State Pension by paying National Insurance or through, for example, receiving benefits credits towards their National Insurance record. Some people paid National Insurance to build up entitlement to an earnings-related State Pension on top of the Basic State Pension. The earnings-related State Pension was called the Additional State Pension.
Not everyone paid National Insurance towards the Additional State Pension. Some people who joined personal or workplace pension schemes ‘contracted out’ of the Additional State Pension when they joined those schemes. While they continued to build up qualifying years for a Basic State Pension, they gave up their entitlement to the Additional State Pension for the period they were contracted out because they contributed less into the National Insurance system. So a person who had always contracted out would have been entitled to the Basic State Pension and their personal or workplace pension when they reached State Pension age, instead of being entitled to the Basic State Pension and Additional State Pension.
From 6 April 2016, the new State Pension replaced the Basic State Pension and the Additional State Pension. The full rate of the new State Pension is higher than the full rate of the old Basic State Pension. People who were contracted out of the Additional State Pension before 6 April 2016 but have reached, or will reach, State Pension age on or after 6 April 2016 may not be eligible for the full rate of new State Pension. A ‘contracted out deduction’ is made when calculating their starting amount of new State Pension to reflect the periods when they contributed less into the National Insurance system in return for a personal or workplace pension.
Transitional arrangements introduced with the new State Pension mean the starting amount of the new State Pension for the complainants - and people like them – is no less than what their starting amount of State Pension would have been under the ‘old’ rules. The transitional arrangements also allow them to do things to add to their starting amount of new State Pension if it is lower than the full rate. Having looked at the complainants’ individual circumstances, we do not consider they have lost any opportunities to add to their starting amount.
We find that maladministration in DWP’s complaint handling caused complainants unnecessary stress and anxiety and meant an opportunity to lessen their distress was lost. For some complainants, it also caused unnecessary worry and confusion.
On the proposed remedy
When we find that complainants have suffered injustice as a result of maladministration, we would usually recommend their injustice is remedied in line with our Principles for Remedy. When making recommendations for financial remedy, we take account of our guidance on financial remedy and our severity of injustice scale.
While it is unusual for organisations we investigate not to accept and act on our recommendations, we have no powers to compel them to comply. When an organisation does not comply with our recommendations, we can lay a report before Parliament so that Parliament can act to protect citizens’ rights.
What DWP has told us during this investigation leads us to strongly doubt it will provide a remedy. Complainants have also told us they doubt DWP’s ability or intent to provide a remedy. Given the scale of the impact of DWP’s maladministration, and the urgent need for a remedy, we are taking the rare but necessary step of asking Parliament to intervene. We are laying our report before Parliament under s10(3) Parliamentary Commissioner Act and asking Parliament to identify a mechanism for providing appropriate remedy for those who have suffered injustice. We think this will provide the quickest route to remedy for those who have suffered injustice because of DWP’s maladministration. To help Parliament with its considerations, we have set out in this document what we would consider an appropriate remedy.
We say more about DWP’s stance and the basis for our approach in this report.
Waspi women deserve compensation for state pension rise communication failure, watchdog says
The so-called Waspi women deserve compensation for what they suffered as. result of the government not giving them adequate warning about the rise in their state pension age, a watchdog has said.
The Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman is recommending compensation in a report out this morning.
But the report from the ombudsman says the Department for Work and Pensions has so far refused to consider compensation, and it says parliament should now consider intervening.
PHSO chief executive Rebecca Hilsenrath, said:
The UK’s national ombudsman has made a finding of failings by DWP in this case and has ruled that the women affected are owed compensation. DWP has clearly indicated that it will refuse to comply. This is unacceptable. The department must do the right thing and it must be held to account for failure to do so.
Complainants should not have to wait and see whether DWP will take action to rectify its failings. Given the significant concerns we have that it will fail to act on our findings and given the need to make things right for the affected women as soon as possible, we have proactively asked parliament to intervene and hold the department to account.
Parliament now needs to act swiftly, and make sure a compensation scheme is established. We think this will provide women with the quickest route to remedy.
4.3m children living in poverty, up 100,000 on previous year, DWP figures show
The Department for Work and Pensions has published a raft of data relating to poverty today.
The most important document is probably this one, the Households Below Average Income (HBAI) report. Alongside the main report, there are also various tables, available here.
But the DWP has also published various other collections of data including:
A report on children in low income families
A report on pensioners’ incomes
A report on income dynamics, and the persistence of low income
Save the Children says the figures show that the number of children being brought up in relative poverty has risen by 100,000 since the previous year, and has now reached 4.3 million.
It is using the relative poverty after housing costs definition, and it says 30% of children in the UK are poor using this measure. The latest figures cover the financial year ending in 2023.
Meghan Meek-O’Connor, senior child poverty policy adviser at the charity, said:
Today 4.3 million children are being failed. It is an outrage that 100,000 more children are in poverty – they are being forgotten.
These shocking figures should be an urgent wake up call to all of us, especially the UK government: we cannot go on like this. There is no reason children should be going without food, heating, toys, or beds.
Families need an adequate social security system that keeps children out of poverty, and provides them with a basic level of safety and security. The UK government must scrap the unfair two-child-limit, and introduce a ‘child lock’ on children’s social security to protect children from hardship and suffering.
Q: Why won’t Labour commit to rejoining the EU?
Because we had a referendum and the country voted to leave, Starmer says.
But he says the Brexit deal was a bad one. He wants to improve it.
And that is the end of the Q&A.
Q: What will you do about people getting scurvy?
Starmer says he shudders at the thought that someone should even have to ask about this in the 21st century.
He says Labour will have breakfast clubs for schools, which will help ensure children are better fed.
And he wants to bring down energy bills. He recalls being shocked meeting a pensioner who did not get out of bed until lunchtime because her house was too cold.
Q: I work in the NHS and am worried about Wes Streeting talking about the NHS using the private sector. Ear cleaning is something that you cannot get on the NHS anymore. There are claims Starmer and Streeting have interests in the private sector.
Starmer says he is not going to privatise the NHS. It will always be publicly funded, and free at the point of need.
But Labour does support using the private sector to get operations done. That is happening at the moment.
That is not part of a plan to privatise the service, he says.
Q: Some people need their ears syringed twice a year. It costs £80. Can you change that, so that people can get it on the NHS again.
Starmer says he is not across the detail of that. He will look at it.
Updated
Q: Are you supporting Esther Rantzen’s campaign for an assisted dying law?
Starmer says he is. He says as director of public prosecutions he produced guidelines to limit prosecutions for people who help someone end their life.
He says he supports an assisted dying law, but with very strong safeguards.
This would be a free vote matter, he says.
The next viewer asks about his water bill. It has gone up hugely, he says, but the water companies are not accountable. In effect this is taxation without representation.
Starmer says he wants much tighter regulation of the water sector. And people at the top should be personally liable for pollution.
Q: That won’t stop the pollution.
Starmer says making bosses personally accountable will make a difference.
Q: Do you want to see bosses in jail?
Starmer says he wants to see the water get cleaner. Making bosses accountable will make a difference.
Starmer is now taking questions from viewers.
The first is about small boats.
Starmer says this is a massive problem. But he says the Rwanda policy is an expensive gimmick. Labour would focus on tackling the gangs, dealing with claims more quickly, and getting more returns.
The viewer questions whether this will work. Vine says the government is already trying to smash the gangs.
Starmer does not accept that.
Those boats that are being used across are being made more or less to order. They’re being stored in warehouses in Europe, they’ve been brought to the coast in France and people get in them. It is not impossible to take down a business model like that.
Starmer says he talks to Blair 'a lot', especially for advice on preparing for government
Q: Peter Mandelson said recently you should lose a few pounds.
Starmer says he was a bit surprised, but he “couldn’t care less”. He says he will invite Mandelson to the five-a-side football games he plays.
He says he is getting advice from lots of people now.
Q: Do you take advice from the Blairites or the Brownites?
Both, says Starmer. But he says he is talking to Tony Blair “a lot”, particularly about what it was like being in opposition just before the election, and what it is like getting the opposition ready for government.
Updated
Q; Are you feeling sorry for the Princess of Wales at the moment?
Yes, says Starmer. We should leave her alone.
He says that is a human response, “as a dad and a human being”.
Q: Sunak is more popular than his party. But you are less popular than yours.
Starmer says, when he became Labour leader, people told him he would never turn things round in five years. It would take 10 years at best, they said. He did not accept that, he says.
Vine turns to the junior doctors’ strike.
Q: Will you pay them the 35% they want?
Starmer says the government must resolve this.
Q: 10% 20%?
Starmer says he cannot negotiate on air. But the government must resolve this.
Vine repeats his claim that Starmer has a record of ditching difficult policies. He mentions a ceasefire in Gaza, the two-child benefit cap, what happened with the Rochdale candidate, his stance on Margaret Thatcher.
Starmer does not accept Vine’s point. He starts with Gaza, and says that after the 7 October attack, telling Israel not to use force to get its hostages back was not something any serious politican was going to say.
Keir Starmer interviewed by Jeremy Vine on Channel 5
Keir Starmer is being interviewed now on Jeremy Vine’s show on Channel 5.
Vine starts by asking how people can know what Starmer stands for when he keeps changing his policies. He asks specifically about the decision to ditch the £28bn annual green investment plan.
Starmer says economic circumstances changed. But he says the commitment to clean electricity by 2030 remains.
Work and pensions secretary Mel Stride suggests mental health culture has 'gone too far'
Good morning. Mel Stride, the work and pensions secretary, may face a huge problem landing on his desk today. The Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman is due to publish a report recommending a response to the long-running campaign by Waspi women – women who lost out because they had not had sufficient warning about the pension age for women going up from 60. Compensation could cost billions.
It is not clear how the government will respond, but in an interview with the Daily Telegraph published this morning Stride opened himself up to criticism on another front, by claiming that concern for people’s mental health may have gone “too far”. He told the paper:
While I’m grateful for today’s much more open approach to mental health, there is a danger that this has gone too far.
There is a real risk now that we are labelling the normal ups and downs of human life as medical conditions which then actually serve to hold people back and, ultimately, drive up the benefit bill …
If they go to the doctor and say ‘I’m feeling rather down and bluesy’, the doctor will give them on average about seven minutes and then, on 94% of occasions, they will be signed off as not fit to carry out any work whatsoever.
Stride also told the paper that he feared some people were now “convincing themselves they have some kind of serious mental health condition as opposed to the normal anxieties of life”.
He admitted that this was a sensitive topic. But he said “an honest, grown-up debate” was needed and he added:
It is too important for people and their futures, too important for the way that welfare works and too important for the economy to just ignore.
Stride was making the comment to defend changes to the work capabality assessment, a process used to decide when people qualify for sickness benefits because they are too ill to work. The government is making the rules stricter.
TELEGRAPH: Mental health culture has gone too far, says Stride #TomorrowsPapersToday pic.twitter.com/ALoMpyWW4X
— Neil Henderson (@hendopolis) March 20, 2024
Here is the agenda for the day.
9.15am: Keir Starmer is inteviewed by Jeremy Vine on Channel 5.
9.30am: The Department for Work and Pensisons publishes annual poverty figures.
After 10.30am: Penny Mordaunt, leader of the Commons, gives a statement to MPs on forthcoming Commons business.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing.
Afternoon: James Cleverly, the home secretary, is on a visit with Sussex police.
And at some point today the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman is publishing a long-awaited report into the Waspi women – women who lost out because they did not get sufficient warning about the state pension age for women going up. It is a report to parliament, and so timing of its publication is a matter for the Commons.
If you want to contact me, do use the “send us a message” feature. You’ll see it just below the byline – on the left of the screen, if you are reading on a laptop or a desktop. This is for people who want to message me directly. I find it very useful when people message to point out errors (even typos – no mistake is too small to correct). Often I find your questions very interesting, too. I can’t promise to reply to them all, but I will try to reply to as many as I can, either in the comments below the line; privately (if you leave an email address and that seems more appropriate); or in the main blog, if I think it is a topic of wide interest.
Updated
