Challenge

The 1995 Pensions Act and subsequent 2011 Pensions Act changed women’s state pension age from 60 to 66, without giving adequate notice. As a result, tens of thousands of women born in the 1950s were plunged into poverty, with many having their retirement plans destroyed.

Founded in 2015, The Women Against State Pension Inequality (WASPI) Campaign immediately became part of the national conversation, with headlines focussing on the financial implications caused by the Government’s mismanagement.

Five years later, when this consistent coverage began to dry up as they pushed out the same message, WASPI approached Higginson Strategy looking to refresh their media narrative and position their cause at the top of the government’s agenda.

Solution

Higginson Strategy changed the narrative of the campaign to focus on the number of WASPI women who died without receiving compensation. Regular surveys and analysis of ONS data provided powerful headlines for journalists and politicians alike, with the figure of ‘one WASPI women dying every 13 minutes’ being quoted regularly in the press and in Parliament.

Outcome

In March 2024 a long-running investigation by the Parliamentary & Health Service Ombudsman recommended compensation for the 3.6 million affected women, vindicating the campaign.

In that month alone, Higginson Strategy secured more than 5,500 mentions of the campaign alongside 50 broadcast interviews on the day of the Ombudsman’s announcement. More than 150 MPs wrote to ministers and the Ombudsman in support of WASPI’s calls for fair and fast compensation.

The campaign led national bulletins throughout the day, starting on BBC Breakfast and Radio 4’s Today programmes, before concluding on Newsnight. The following day, WASPI dominated eight front pages across the UK, securing leading articles in The Times, the Daily Mail, the Daily Express, and The Mirror.

The campaign’s membership has increased by more than 50% in the past year, raising a six-figure sum from supporters to fund a successful judicial review that forced the Ombudsman to rewrite their report.