It means she has to wait an extra six years before she is eligible for her state pension and to say she isn’t happy about it would be an understatement.
The same is true the other 499,999 women born in the 1950s are affected by the change and who can blame them? To be told that you have to spend an extra tenth of you life with your nose to the grindstone than you’d ever planned for is a bit of a bombshell to say the least.
Baroness Altman * (above) is the minister responsible for ‘increasing saving for, and security in, later life’ and thinks the sudden change is okay because those affected were given clear warning by letter in 2011 (I think). In other words, they were given five years to save for their security in later life if they chose to retire at sixty as they had always planned.
A perfect example of ‘because we say so’ government that is steamrollered through parliament without a thought for impact it has on real people. But there is some light at the end of the tunnel. Pressure from the likes of Women Against State Pension Inequality seems to be gaining some traction with an intractable government with a committee of MPs recommending some sort of compromise.
I do hope so – it would be good for Mrs P’s blood pressure.
* I tried my best to find out what Baroness Altman was paid and what pension she can expect from the state, but the DWP website wasn’t forthcoming. But she was allegedly one of the Tory infiltrators in last year’s Labour leadership contest.