Women who have spent years fighting for compensation following alterations to their State Pension payments may soon receive an answer. The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has confirmed that a decision concerning a review into State Pension age compensation for women born during the 1950s will be “reported to the House before the beginning of March”.

As reported by the Daily Record, Pensions Minister Torsten Bell provided this update to MPs in Parliament on Monday (January 26) during a standard DWP oral questions session. Liberal Democrat MP Lee Dillon asked whether the DWP had undertaken any assessment of the “potential merits of compensating 1950s-born women affected by the maladministration of State Pension age changes”.

Responding to the Newbury MP, Mr Bell said: “As the Secretary of State (Pat McFadden) set out on 11 November 2025, we are re-taking the decision made in December 2024 as it relates to the communications on State Pension age. We will update the House on the decision as soon as a conclusion is reached.”

Mr Dillon told the House that he was among 100 MPs who had signed a cross-party letter calling on the UK Government to take action on behalf of the so-called WASPI women (Women Against State Pension Inequality Campaign). He added: “Such is the strength of feeling in my constituency that I am regularly contacted about this issue.”

Mr Dillon also questioned whether consultations with the WASPI campaign were included in the review process.

The Pensions Minister responded: “As I said, we will update the House as soon as a conclusion is reached. We have committed in public to doing so within three months of the decision in December, which means a decision will be reported to the House before the beginning of March.

“I gently say that we need to be clear about what is at stake here: this decision relates narrowly to the question of the communication of the State Pension age changes.

“For many women, including many of my constituents, the issue they are actually most focused on is the increase, and the acceleration in the increase, in the State Pension age that was put in place by the coalition Government, which not a single Lib Dem MP voted against back in 2011.”

Liberal Democrat MP Sarah Dyke highlighted that more than 8,000 women across her Glastonbury and Somerton constituency have been affected by changes to the State Pension age, sharing how one woman “has lost a staggering £50,000” after being unable to continue working and having to sell her property. At 70 years old, Miriam has now returned to employment.

Ms Dyke added: “Miriam and women like her deserve fairness. Will the Minister commit to properly compensating 1950s-born women, and will the Government consult with the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman before finalising their response?” Mr Bell replied: “I know that many of our sympathies would be with Miriam. Many Members have constituents who face challenges in the years running up to the State Pension age and who are, for whatever reason, unable to work.”

However, he stressed that the £50,000 loss in earnings “does not relate to the issue of communication of the State Pension age” but rather concerns the “increase and acceleration in the State Pension age” which was introduced by a Liberal Democrat Government, and “not a single Liberal Democrat MP voted against it”.

Mr Bell added: “It is important to be clear about what is and is not part of the PHSO’s investigation. As I say, it is very important that we take these issues seriously. We should not have seen an acceleration of the State Pension age where some women were only given five years’ notice, but that was put in place by the coalition Government. We will not be making those mistakes.”

WASPI correspondence to DWP

Last week, the WASPI campaign disclosed that 100 MPs have supported a letter urging the UK Government to “reach the right decision” for women born in the 1950s, who have been financially impacted by changes to the State Pension age. The letter urges Work and Pensions Secretary Pat McFadden to deliver an update on the proposals by 2 March “at the latest”.

In November, Mr McFadden suggested the DWP would reconsider a previously declared stance against compensating women born in the 1950s who were affected by pension age changes implemented under consecutive governments. This shift came after legal proceedings revealed a 2007 Department for Work and Pensions evaluation that had earlier led officials to cease sending automatic State Pension forecast letters.

However, Mr McFadden offered no guarantees to campaigners that the review would lead to financial compensation.

A Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman report had previously suggested that compensation ranging from £1,000 to £2,950 per individual might be appropriate for those affected by how State Pension changes had been communicated.

Yet, in December 2024, the UK Government accepted the ombudsman’s finding of maladministration and apologised for delays in reaching out to women born in the 1950s, but determined that a blanket compensation scheme, potentially costing taxpayers up to £10.5 billion, could not be justified.