Women who lose out under state pension age increases can ease their losses by claiming other benefits including jobseeker's allowance, a Government minister has suggested.

Work and pensions minister Shailesh Vara defended the policy by insisting they need to be considered in a "broad context", which includes a "whole lot of other benefits" plus other pensions changes, amid Tory pressure for extra help.

Plans to increase the state pension age for women from 60 to 65 between 2010 and 2020 were initially set out in 1995.

But the coalition government decided to speed up the process in 2011, resulting in the state pension age for women due to increase to 65 in November 2018 and to 66 by October 2020.

Campaigners argue women affected have had to rethink their retirement plans at relatively short notice and suffered "undue hardship".

Conservative former minister Sir Edward Leigh (Gainsborough) told of a constituent who believes she will lose up to £55,000 due to the delay in receiving her pension.

After exchanges between the Labour and Conservative frontbenches, Sir Edward told Mr Vara: "I'm not sure whether it really helps these ladies, some of whom are in very difficult circumstances, for both frontbenches to trade insults.

"The fact is that although everybody accepts there should be equalisation, a widow came to see me on Friday, she's worked hard all her life, she's got no occupational pension and she says she's going to lose - because she was also paying into Serps (state earnings related pension scheme) - up to £55,000.

"This is a real blow for her, she has very little savings. Is there no way we can perhaps look at further transitional concessions, maybe a cap, so we can help some of these disadvantaged ladies?"

Mr Vara replied: "You are absolutely right that we need to discuss this in a measured way. But that means we need to look at things in a broad context.

"There are a whole lot of other benefits that are available to the women who maybe affected.

"For example, there's jobseeker's allowance, there's employment and support allowance, there's income support, carer's allowance, personal independence payments.

"And let us not forget that also pensions will be uprated. There's the triple-lock. There's the simplified new state pension, which is coming in from April. Pension freedom, which allows those who have a pension to be able to have some flexibility.

"Cold weather payments - there's a permanent increase there. Winter fuel payment has been protected - over 12 million pensioners benefited from that last year. And as far as female employment is concerned, I've mentioned a number of benefits that we have brought in for them.

"So it is important that we look at things in a broad context rather than simply looking at people in the narrow confines that people prefer to debate in this chamber at the moment."

Earlier, Sir David Amess (Southend West) said he accepted "huge sums of money" were being spoken about, noting he was an MP in 1995 when the changes were announced.

He added to Mr Vara: "But would you consider whether the Government has taken appropriate action in communicating these significant changes to women so that they can make preparations for their retirement, a nd has it been clearly advertised on the Government websites?"

In his reply, Mr Vara said there were at least 10 Labour pensions ministers who made "absolutely no effort in terms of communication".

He added: "I just want to put it on the record that as far as the Pensions Act 2011 is concerned, over five million people were written to - women who would have been affected, with the addresses we had from HMRC.

"Information is available on the Government website for those who want to seek more information."

SNP MPs were among those asking for further changes to help women born in the 1950s who may be affected by the pension age increase.

Ian Blackford, the SNP's pensions spokesman, asked Mr Vara to apologise for the "utter shambles" of the acceleration of the project and for a Government website stating that the women's pensionable age is 60.

Mr Vara told Mr Blackford not to focus on one mistake, adding it has been corrected.

Mr Blackford asked the minister: "Will you apologise formally for the utter shambles your department has made of communicating the changes - both to the acceleration pace as raised by the Waspi ( Women Against State Pension Inequality campaign) women, and for the inaccurate communication made to pensioners regarding national insurance contributions.

"We have learnt over the weekend that the Government gateway is still showing the women's pensionable age is 60.

"How do you expect the House and the public to have confidence in your department's ability when they have failed so spectacularly to communicate and deliver fairness?"

Mr Vara replied: "The issue you refer to is isolated and you should regard it as such.

"The matter has been corrected and it's about time you took on board all the other arguments that have been raging about this particular issue rather than one solitary, individual mistake on a website, which has been corrected."

Labour's Rachel Reeves, a former shadow work and pensions secretary, said many of the women affected care for elderly parents or young grandchildren.

The Leeds West MP told Mr Vara: "Many have been working since they were 15 years old and very few of them have significant pensions savings.

"So will you give these women some hope and look at transitional arrangements, for example by allowing women affected to draw their pension credit early to help them through this difficult time?"

Conservative frontbencher Mr Vara replied: "A concession was made in 2011 - at second reading, the secretary of state said he'd go away and think about matters and consider them.

"He did, came back and made a concession worth £1.1 billion, ensured that the two-year extension was reduced to 18 months - and in the case of 18 months, 81% of the women affected would have to work no more than 12 months."

Speaking in a later debate, Sir Edward said his constituent should not have to go "cap in hand" to the jobcentre.

He said: "In his reply to me this afternoon, when I mentioned the case of a constituent who is a widow who is severely affected by this, (Mr Vara) read out a long list of benefits that the lady could receive.

"Unfortunately she can't work and, in a sense, having paid in all her life for 35 years, why should she go cap in hand to the jobcentre?"

Sir Edward made the remarks as MPs debated an e-petition from Waspi, which received more than 140,000 signatures and called for "fair transitional arrangements" for all women born on or after April 6 1951.

Several MPs had to stand due to the high level of interest in the Westminster Hall debate.

Earlier in the debate, Conservative Tania Mathias (Twickenham) said: "These 1950s heroines, not only have they worked all their lives but they have - because they didn't have the notice and they didn't have notice in time - have opted now to be carers for their mothers or mothers-in-law and they're contributing even now."

Conservative Richard Graham (Gloucester) praised the Waspi campaign although said he could not support the petition.

He told MPs: "All the points they make about communication in the past will have been noted and largely accepted by almost everybody in the House, and the lessons to be learned are the ones I've emphasised, in terms of what the DWP can take from this for future changes if they're made to the state pension age and the way in which those are communicated.

"But the central ask of the campaign, in terms of changing the state pension which will be received by people born in the 1950s, is, I believe, one not supported by many supporters of the Waspi campaign - who themselves understand that £30 billion or more is not an appropriate ask when there are so many other good causes on which money should be spent.

"Therefore, on that basis, I do not believe the e-petition's call for fair transitional arrangements, which amount to that, is one which this House should support."

Labour's Sharon Hodgson ( Washington and Sunderland West) said two of her constituents informed her they did not receive letters informing them about the changes.

She added: " I think the DWP has been negligent and therefore we should see some transition arrangements because of that."

Mark Durkan, the Social Democratic & Labour Party MP for Foyle, said: "This Parliament will see a lot of centenary landmarks of the struggle of votes for women.

"Is the message from this Parliament going to be to say to this group of women that they have to take the hit for equality and for deficit reduction by having their pension rights absolutely scrambled?

"If we tolerate this it'll be an intentional injustice. They won't be just passing accidental casualties, it will be deliberative, it will be targeted and, not just by ministers, this Parliament will have conspired and connived in it and that's why we have to change and the campaign must continue."

For the SNP, Mr Blackford criticised Mr Vara's suggestion that women affected by the changes could claim benefits.

He told the debate: "Does that not explain the problem here of a Government that doesn't get this?

"It wants women to go to the jobcentre rather than what they should be doing - collecting a pension they are entitled to."

Tory Caroline Ansell (Eastbourne) told Mr Blackford there are MPs from all sides who support the cause along with women of all political persuasions.

Mr Blackford replied: "What I would say to you and your colleagues - join us in the lobby. Vote this Government down for these proposals, we need to see change.

"So we need to get the Tory backbenchers to actually have some backbone and recognise the problems that women in their constituencies are facing."

Shadow work and pensions minister Angela Rayner said the number of signatures on the petition was very impressive, adding: " We have revealed today that the numbers affected by the subject are even greater at more than 2.5 million nationally."

Replying for the Government, Mr Vara reiterated earlier arguments he made in the Commons and insisted the parliamentary process was "fully followed" over the proposals.

He later told MPs: "Our collective responsibility now is to support this package of reforms and rather than causing continued confusion for those affected, we need to build further awareness around the measures I've set out today."

Labour MP Helen Jones (Warrington North), who led the debate, described Mr Vara's response as "totally inadequate" and criticised his " failure to address the issues" raised.

Invoking a rarely used quirk of parliamentary procedure, she called a vote on the motion that the e-petition had been considered by the House. MPs then opposed the motion unanimously.

The debate was therefore "negatived", according to the Commons Table Office, meaning MPs did not agree that the matter had been considered.