Genuine question re pensioner fuel payment cut

[Katypp]

Just this: How would the Labour supporters react if three weeks into a new Conservative Government, the chancellor cut the winter fuel payment to any pensioner with an income of more than £11k?
Would you think it was a reasonable thing to do or would it be considered cruel because it was the Tories implementing it, not Labour?
I would imagine Angela Raynor, Yvette Cooper and Wes Streeting would have been very vocal and worried about it.
Would the public finances argument wash if it was a Tory Government? It didn't when Cameron came into power.
What's different?

Management will not allow us to report fraud, only to explain to the client that giving false information is fraudulent, and if for example we find out that someone is commiting benefit fraud eg they have undeclared savings or have someone living with them and are claiming as single then we just have to inform them in writing that it is advisable to come clean !! Some are unwittingly doing things and then it has kind of gone on too long for them to put it right and we offer to support them to ring DWP. I am not scared of losing my job because at times it becomes difficult to go on like this. I am by no means saying this is an everyday occurrence, the vast majority are genuine people who need help.

Also doctors and staff in hospitals. This government bashing is ill thought out. No matter what they do to sort the economic mess this country is in the Telegraph, Mail, etc etc etc will be digging for headlines that destroy any hope we need to have in any new initiatives. They also manufacture fears that then become realities in the eyes of those who are only too willing to believe them.

So you're saying it's ok for people to commit fraud because it's balanced out by those who don't make claims when they could? What a bizarre way to think.

If people didn't commit fraud there would be even more money for those who genuinely needed it.

I’m not saying that at all. It most definitely would be a bizarre way to think. I was pointing out that there’s zero cost to the taxpayer. If people didn’t commit fraud non fraudulent claimants wouldn’t get more money, they’re not getting more because lots of people who are entitled don’t claim, are they?

The Tories were vilified on here for the last 14 years, or is government bashing ok as long as it's not Labour?

They've only been in a month and already they have targeted a vulnerable group.

How do the powers that be in the DWP and HMRC know this. How do they know that 800k people should be on pension credit when i suspect they do not know all the details of their situation.
If they are so sure these people are out there - automatically invite them by putting them automatically on the pension credit tariff. I suspect that this figure is at best an estimate,
I must admit I was heartened by someone's suggestion elsewhere that every pensioner should apply for PC just on the off-chance that they are eligible. Not with false figures of course but just to highlight whether that figure is correct or not.

Government bashing is absolutely fine as long as it is not Labour. Labour are much more caring than the Tories, so all the followers prior to the election can be confident that their much-talked-about moral compasses are still pointing the right way because RR had no choice, apparently.
Of course, when the Tories had to clean up after the last Labour goverment, they were cruel and evil but whevs.
As I have said upthread, any Labour supporter who genuinely thinks that neither they or Labour MPs would be shouting from the rooftops about this new policy had it been introduced by the Tories are seriously deluded.
I also h note that professional worrier Yvette Cooper has been much quieter about the riots than she would have been if she was still a shadow minister. Obviously it's a lot easier to criticise what the other lot are doing than actually come up with solutions yourself.
Still, at least the grown-ups are in charge.

Well who is paying for it then, because the money for fraudulent claims has to come from somewhere. Labour's magic money tree!

The benefits budget is underspent by virtue of unclaimed entitlements. Ergo money that’s been allocated hasn’t been used and there is no cost to the taxpayer. It’s not rocket science.

No, the benefits budget assumes a certain level of people not claiming, just as the tax income budget assumes a certain level of tax evasion. The "budget" figures are their best estimates of actual income and expenditure. There is no "pot of money" sat there waiting for someone to claim it. If more people claimed, then the debt/borrowing would increase to pay for it. Just as if more people paid the "right" amount of tax, the debt/borrowing would reduce.

It's all based on estimates. Govt doesn't know the financial affairs of everyone. Lots of data won't be known, either to HMRC, such as interest/dividends on tax free ISA accounts or in fact dividends from any investments as dividends are not automatically notified to HMRC by companies! They can't possibly check everyone's affairs and work out total income, etc., even though a lot of data is actually already held within HMRC, i.e. pensions, wages, bank interest, etc. hence why they demand that several million people fill in annual self assessment tax returns. We're years/decades away from automating it all and having some "super" computer that puts it all together. So the "gap" between claimants and theoretical claimants is basically an educated guess!

Of course it is a cost to the tax payer, who do you think is providing the money for benefits. Just because it is within budget doesn't mean it is cost free.

Do you think as a citizen you have a duty to either report the fraud or whistle blow on your organisation?

I don't know the answer to this and you might not either but perhaps someone will. Do bus passes cost anything (other than printing them) if they aren't used?

I do think this is bizarre. What do you think happens to the unclaimed money if fraudsters don't get it? a. It gets ripped up or b. It goes back into the government coffers?

You’re not going to be given your share of the underspend back, are you? It has zero effect on the amount of tax we pay.

It will be money the government has in it's pocket to pay off our debts or more to spend on essentials or even to go towards tax cuts.

What about this as a scenario: Shops allow a certain amount for "shrinkage" i.e.goods that get stolen. Now if your local Sainsbury's allows for 10% and only 9% gets stolen is it OK if you go in and help yourself to the other 1%? I mean Sainsbury's aren't losing anything by your logic as it was in their budget to lose 10%.

Our LA still has the household support fund, a good compromise would be to have a discretionary fund like this administered by LAs to effectively offer the same money but on a local level and when individuals apply

I support cutting the WFP but not bus passes. The whole point in bus passes is to try and tempt dangerous elderly drivers out of their cars for the good of everyone, surely?

I also was thinking this would be a solution. the problem being that it has to be applied for. In our county you have to have someone from an organisation like CAB, Age Uk etc apply on your behalf which would create a huge amount of work for organizations that are already overwhelmed from people in need. It might work if you could directly apply yourself.

There would be outrage. I do think it should be cut for some people but not everyone who doesn't receive pension credit as many people who don't receive that could still be on a very low income. Perhaps there should be another tier so that these people get some but not all?

A quick Google says they cost £1billion per year.

The cut off is far too low. I don’t know how anyone thinks 11k a year is sufficient.

The answer to the question is that the cost is for journeys taken. An unused bus pass costs nothing except the price of producing the laminated card.

And the entire infrastructure around it, i.e. admin, management, etc for applications, renewals, etc. The cost is a hell of a lot more than a laminated card! There's staffing, buildings, systems, equipment, etc.