Starmer's WASPI Betrayal: Labour's Shameful Abandonment of Working-Class Women
Remember he's on his big fat DPP pension. What does he know about ageing women?’ These scathing words from veteran Labour MP Diane Abbott lay bare the utter disconnect between Labour's leadership and the plight of millions of women they've so callously abandoned. Abbott further stated, ‘This isn’t about economics; it’s about respect and doing the right thing. Starmer’s refusal to act is patronising and reeks of elitism, as if he thinks these women are too naive to understand their own struggle.’(Abbott, 2024). Such statements highlight the depth of frustration with Starmer’s dismissive attitude toward a critical issue.
The WASPI campaign represents approximately 3.8 million women born in the 1950s, victims of a cruel bait-and-switch by successive governments that robbed them of years of pension payments. These women weren't merely affected by changes to the state pension age; they were blindsided, their financial futures shattered by government incompetence and indifference (WASPI, 2023).
The Labour Party’s handling of the issue has compounded this betrayal. While Keir Starmer briefly acknowledged the controversy in opposition, his actions in power have revealed an unsettling hypocrisy. For a leader whose pension enjoys extraordinary protections under the Pensions Increase (Pension Scheme for Keir Starmer QC) Regulations 2013, it is deeply ironic that he has denied justice to millions of working-class women. This regulation, which came into force on 31st October 2013, ensures that Starmer’s pension is shielded from tax liabilities (UK Government, 2013). For a former Director of Public Prosecutions who once championed justice, this contradiction undermines both his rhetoric and credibility.
Labour's Disgraceful U-Turn
Labour's decision to deny compensation, announced by Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall, is nothing short of a betrayal of everything the party once claimed to stand for. Compounding the insult is Starmer’s tone, which often comes across as patronising, almost as if he’s looking down on the WASPI women, suggesting they don’t understand economics or that the fault lies with them. This ‘silly women’ implication—that their financial struggles are of their own making—only deepens the perception of disconnect between Labour’s leadership and those they claim to represent (Abbott, 2024).
Kendall justified the decision by arguing that £10.5 billion in compensation wouldn't be ‘fair or value for taxpayers' money’ (Kendall, 2024). While it is true that such a figure represents a significant financial outlay, the framing of this argument exposes deeper ideological choices within the party—choices that prioritize fiscal conservatism over justice and fairness.
Adding to the betrayal is the apparent shift in positions by key Labour figures. Rachel Reeves, now Chancellor, previously expressed support for WASPI women, even appearing with campaigners in 2020 and promising to ‘identify and deliver a fair solution to all women affected’ (Sky News, 2024). Her recent statements defending Labour's refusal to pay compensation, citing that ‘most affected women were aware of the changes,’ stand in stark contrast to her earlier commitments. Angela Rayner, Deputy Prime Minister, also previously championed the WASPI cause, stating in 2019 that Labour would ‘right that injustice’ within five years of forming a government. This apparent reversal has led to criticism from both within and outside the party, as Labour's leadership now aligns itself with fiscal pragmatism rather than justice (The Times, 2024).
The Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO) had previously recommended compensation ranging from £1,000 to £2,950 per woman due to maladministration by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) (PHSO, 2022). The WASPI campaign argued for more substantial compensation, up to £10,000 per person, highlighting the severe financial hardship caused by poor communication of these changes. Labour’s refusal to act on even the modest PHSO recommendations reflects not only a disregard for these women but a broader indifference to systemic injustice.
Keir Starmer, during his time in opposition, expressed vocal support for the WASPI women, stating in 2020: ‘The government’s treatment of 1950s-born women has been nothing short of disgraceful. Labour stands with WASPI women in their fight for justice’ (Starmer, 2020). Yet, in power, Starmer has failed to deliver on these words, illustrating a troubling pattern of broken promises.
Starmer's Pension Contradiction
The hypocrisy surrounding Starmer’s pension protections stands out as one of the most glaring aspects of this controversy. The Pensions Increase (Pension Scheme for Keir Starmer QC) Regulations 2013 explicitly shields his pension from tax liabilities—a benefit that ordinary working-class individuals could never dream of accessing. For a leader who claims to champion fairness and justice, this contradiction reveals a stark double standard (UK Government, 2013).
Starmer, the former Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), built his career on principles of justice and accountability. Yet, his refusal to compensate WASPI women for what is clearly a historic wrong places him on the wrong side of this debate. The optics are devastating: a former DPP, a figure whose role was to oversee justice, turning away from compensating women whose financial futures were decimated by government maladministration.
The disconnect between Labour’s leadership and the electorate is further exacerbated by this contradiction. While millions of working-class women are denied their rightful compensation under the guise of fiscal prudence, this Labour leader enjoys protections that highlight the privilege and inequality entrenched within the system. This hypocrisy not only undermines Starmer’s rhetoric but also erodes public trust in Labour as a party that can genuinely deliver change.
This moment could have been a defining one for Starmer—a chance to demonstrate moral leadership and a commitment to justice. Instead, it has become yet another example of his cautious, ideological approach, which often prioritizes maintaining the status quo over transformative action.
Reform UK: Conspicuously Silent Opportunists
Reform UK's deafening silence on this issue exposes their working-class champion act for the sham it is. Their failure to meaningfully engage with the WASPI issue proves they're nothing more than opportunistic vultures, circling the electorate for easy votes without any real commitment to justice. While they posture as a voice for those disillusioned by both Labour and the Conservatives, their inaction here reveals their true priorities: capitalizing on public discontent without offering substantive solutions.
The danger of such silence lies in the false hope it may offer to voters who feel betrayed by both major parties. Reform UK's lack of engagement suggests they are not a credible alternative but rather a hollow vessel for protest votes, devoid of the policy depth needed to tackle systemic injustices like those faced by WASPI women.
Meanwhile, both major parties—the Conservatives and Labour—have failed to deliver justice for these women. For many campaigners, this leaves only one conclusion: true representation for working people continues to come from grassroots movements and left-wing voices advocating tirelessly for fairness. Reform UK's unwillingness to address such a critical issue underscores the importance of looking beyond populist rhetoric to find leaders and movements genuinely committed to change.
Conclusion: A Pattern of Broken Promises
Labour’s refusal to compensate WASPI women is more than a policy failure; it is a moral abdication that exposes the party’s diminishing commitment to justice and fairness. For older women—mothers, daughters, and grandmothers who have been unfairly burdened by pension changes—this betrayal feels deeply personal.
Keir Starmer’s broken promise on this issue is part of a broader pattern of ideological caution that has characterized his leadership. While he campaigned in opposition as a champion of justice, his actions in government reveal a leader who too often chooses political expediency over moral conviction.
The WASPI women’s fight is far from over. Their resilience and determination serve as a reminder that justice cannot be achieved through empty promises and fiscal excuses. The fight for justice demands bold, principled leadership—something sorely lacking in Labour today.
For Starmer, this is yet another missed opportunity to redefine his leadership and offer a compelling vision of fairness. Instead, he has allowed Labour to drift further into the ideological shadow of the Conservatives, alienating a crucial demographic and tarnishing the party’s legacy as a defender of working people.
The fight for justice continues, and it is a fight that demands more than words. It demands action—action that Labour, under its current leadership, seems unwilling to take. The WASPI women’s struggle is emblematic of the broader battle for fairness in society—a fight for accountability, respect, and the protection of the vulnerable. Their perseverance serves as a stark reminder of what is at stake, not just for them, but for the soul of British politics.
Inspired by Diane Abbott MP; Dedicated to PDW and JVS
References
Abbott, D. (2024). Personal commentary on WASPI issue.
Kendall, L. (2024). Statement on Labour’s decision regarding WASPI women.
Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO). (2022). Report on maladministration by DWP.
Sky News. (2024). Rachel Reeves' position on WASPI compensation.
Starmer, K. (2020). Opposition statement on WASPI issue.
The Times. (2024). Angela Rayner’s previous support for WASPI women.
UK Government. (2013). Pensions Increase (Pension Scheme for Keir Starmer QC) Regulations 2013.
WASPI. (2023). Campaign data and analysis on pension age changes.