A prominent legal expert has described the Department for Work and Pensions' handling of the WASPI women's state pension age changes as a 'textbook failure' in public administration.
The Core of the WASPI Controversy
The issue centres on the Women Against State Pension Inequality (WASPI) campaign, which represents women born in the 1950s who were affected by the increase in the state pension age for women from 60 to 65, and subsequently to 66. The central claim is that the DWP failed to provide adequate notice of these significant changes, leaving many women unaware until it was too late to adjust their retirement plans.
This failure was formally recognised by the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman, which found 'maladministration' in the DWP's communication efforts. The watchdog specifically stated that the department should have sent informative letters to the affected women much sooner. As a result, the Ombudsman recommended that the women receive compensation ranging from £1,000 to £2,950.
A Legal Perspective on Government Failure
Michael McCready, founder of the injury lawyers group McCreadyLaw, has analysed the situation as a classic case of poor communication by a public body. He stated, "The WASPI situation is a textbook example of what happens when policy changes get ahead of communication. The Government raised the pension age for women, which is a big deal for anyone planning retirement, and then didn’t do enough to tell them directly."
Mr McCready emphasised the scale of the error, noting, "That’s not just a misstep—that’s a process failure." He expressed astonishment that such a communication breakdown could occur in the modern era, pointing out that the DWP had access to digital tools and data targeting that could have ensured the message reached those affected.
The Ongoing Battle for Compensation
Despite the Ombudsman's clear findings, the DWP announced at the end of last year that it would not provide compensation. The government, then under the Labour party, argued that most women were in fact aware of the change and that earlier letters would have made little difference.
In response, the WASPI campaigners applied for a judicial review of this decision, which is scheduled to be heard on December 9 and 10. However, in a significant recent development, the DWP has this week retracted its decision not to compensate. This U-turn comes in light of fresh evidence that has emerged, and the department has committed to issuing a new decision on the matter.
Mr McCready reinforced the government's duty in such matters, stating, "I understand the argument that people are responsible for knowing the rules that affect them. But most people aren’t tracking Government policy announcements in their spare time. If you change something as significant as the state pension age, and don’t make a serious effort to communicate it directly to those impacted, you can’t turn around and blame them for not knowing."
The state pension age is now 66 for both men and women, with an increase to 67 planned between April 2026 and April 2028. A further rise to 68 is scheduled for between 2044 and 2046, though there have been discussions about bringing this timetable forward.
Looking to the future, Mr McCready suggested that the WASPI issue should serve as a crucial lesson for public agencies like the DWP. He highlighted the potential of modern tools—including AI, analytics, and digital outreach—to prevent such communication breakdowns. "If this review leads to better systems and clearer responsibilities," he concluded, "then something good might still come out of a bad situation. That’s where real progress begins."
