No, it won't (as things stand). However, Defence Minister Anna Soubry has said she was "quite happy" to have another look at whether the changes should be applied retrospectively. She said;
"I think the argument that would be put forward is that many people will say that this is retrospective pension changes and every Government will tell you that you shouldn't do that and that's why we have been able to apply the covenant we believe and it's the right thing to do. Looking at why people who haven't been able to claim it in the past I think that would be, some would say, a step too far because you are doing retrospection retrospectively. I know that probably doesn't make an awful lot of sense but I can see and understand that argument. But, I'm quite happy to go away and say to people, let's have another look at that as well."
The case might exist whereby a widow or widower subject to 75 rules who has remarried and lost the pension entitlement built up by supporting a spouse or civil partner over 20 years, and who then divorces 'badly', will lose out again. Contrast that to someone who marries next week after a whirlwind romance and who is widowed in April 2015.. they keep everything.
This gesture is not tokenism in the strictest sense, handed down in November, but it still doesn't help where and who really need the help, those widows and widowers who were subject to 75 rules affected by fighting in Iraq and Afghan and who are closer to retirement without independent benefits and who might not benefit as much from new state pension benefits by virtue of their age.
The War Widows association has campaigned actively for years and if I were them, I certainly wouldn't be stepping off the gas. In light of Soubry's comments, pressure must be maintained.
The War Widows' Association of Great Britain