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?

Changes to benefit thresholds, personal tax allowance, etc are all expected in due course, so perhaps we should wait and see what happens next? If the pension credit threshold is increased, the majority of those most affected may well find themselves "saved" from the potential loss.

Especially with the potential of the state pension triple lock being scrapped, it could well be that efforts and funding are directed at those needing it the most, rather than every pensioner, thus an increase in pension credit threshold could be announced at the same time as the abolition of the triple lock!

As I say, wait and see!

If the Conservatives had done it then of course Labour would be wailing about it. That's what the Opposition does. I agree that while there are many wealthy older people who don't need it, the gap between those and pensioners on £11k is too great, and there will be those who suffer from this decision. I do hope that none of these people voted Labour, as we had a lot of warning they would go after pensioners (who typically vote Conservative).

Theresa May’s police cuts, coupled with wokism all round was bad for the police. We need to support the police force.

As this country is quite right now, Starmer has no choice but to focus on the more controlling aspects of left wing politics. More police etc., more control.

As prisons are full, should criminals just have all benefits cuts for eg 5 years? Or would that just mean they turn to even more crime? I think they should be put to work in the community like in some other countries. Clean the streets, clean up dog poo, clean graffiti etc

But some of us worked f/t and raised families, and still have very little to live on on older age.

Look at the single parents on here who are tempted to pull out of workplace pension contributions because they just can't make it add up! Many older people worked all or the vast majority of their working lives before employer pension contributions were law - and so have none.

I am just about OK on a little more than state pension and can escape the cold because I am fit and active.

But just because (alongside the many who are struggling) I see many, many MNers with salaries that I could never have dreamed of, I don't 'whinge' about the free childcare hours, the raising of the Child Benefit threshold, free school meals for all for the start of primary etc.

Fine: means test the WFA - but it is way too low set at Basic State Pension level.

It’s not going to help the NHS if old people cannot be discharged home because they will be too cold and stay in hospital to keep warm for longer. Even 1-2 days of longer stay etc costs billions.
I think on the other hand though, those who are elderly and have money should want to pay out rather than hord for their relatives. I think it would be better if politicians explained things nicely to people.
We need to fund state services properly again and those who can need to have their benefits scrapped. That includes pensioners too. Only the poorest should be helped by the state. There is definitely gaming across the whole system. People should be embarrassed to use state services and benefits if they don’t need to.

You see it on here all the time. Rich people lecturing others that they only use NHS and state education. Because apparently that is morally superior. Starmer himself encouraged that kind of thinking with some of his comments - it’s wrong. If you don’t need state help or services don’t use it. The whole rhetoric needs to change. Don’t take any free stuff if you don’t need to.

@Araminta1003

You see it on here all the time. Rich people lecturing others that they only use NHS and state education. Because apparently that is morally superior. Starmer himself encouraged that kind of thinking with some of his comments - it’s wrong. If you don’t need state help or services don’t use it. The whole rhetoric needs to change. Don’t take any free stuff if you don’t need to.

I agree. We need to be encouraging people who can afford it to make their own arrangements rather than rely on the state funded services. Like private healthcare, private education, etc. Unfortunately, given how Labour hate the idea, as seen by VAT on private education, we're not going to see any sign of any encouragement for people to make their own private arrangements.

I'd venture to say we should be offering incentives for people to pay for private education for their kids (or themselves) or private health insurance, private healthcare, etc. If they can afford to do it, then they should have a "nudge" to do so and save the country from having to pay.

I've a neighbour needing an operation who is on a very long waiting list. She can afford to pay privately, she openly admits that, but the political rhetoric stops her from doing so. Instead, she's in constant pain, can't drive and can't walk so she's housebound, and suffering a pretty miserable existence. But despite that, she still won't go private - she could have the operation and be back to somewhere near normal within 3 months, yet the op under the NHS is said to be at least a year away! It's bonkers. She'd rather suffer and lose effectively a year of quality life just because of the political rhetoric against going private.

Insane!

Don't forget the record numbers of able-bodied people who choose not to work nowadays, and instead live on benefits, and who will probably be entitled to more in retirement than those who work and save.

I'm in my 70s. I remember playing on the bomb building sites, they were everywhere in my city. I do remember a man who was terribly disfigured by a fire on the plane he was flying in WWII. I remember my father dealing with his PTSD from WWII by drinking and it killed him while I was a child.

I've never really thought about it but I suppose it did have an effect on us.

Yeah because in the past women had it soooo easy didn't they? It's only today's youngsters who are hard done by isn't it?

Can't believe the misogyny on here against older women.

Do you base all your decision making on the circumstances of a few people you know, @Zanatdy ?

Because if the country was run like that Child Benefit, the NHS, and state education would all be abolished.

Good for your Mum.

What about the pensioners on basic pension? The single women with no savings trying to heat a home on one basic pension?

Perhaps they can all go round to your Mum's on cold days.

To save from dying of hypothermia.

DM is 88 and was working the fields as a child because my grandfather had to go into the Italian army

@Araminta1003 I don't disagree with much of what you say, but wanting to hoard for your relatives is not the only reason that older people want to hang on to their savings. It's the only cushion they have for when their health inevitably declines, the NHS can't fix it in a reasonable time scale, and there is no way they can boost their income. I want my later years to be as full and productive as they can be, and if that means being cautious with my savings, so be it.

@GreenTeaLikesMe My parents are 93 and clearly remember the war. My Dad’s older sister lost two successive fiancés to the war, Mum’s older brother was away on active service, one of them is still in touch with the terrified traumatised evacuees they took in. Then my Dad was called up for National service.

Rationing was still in place til 1954.

The last people called up for National Service didn’t finish it until 1963. A year after the Beatles debut hit single was released.

Quite why there are only a few would make it ok for them all to die of cold I’m not sure.

"Quite why there are only a few would make it ok for them all to die of cold I’m not sure."
Nobody's saying it'd be ok for them to die of cold. Literally nobody. What people ARE saying is that just because they are traumatized from WWII doesn't mean they shouldn't pay for their own fuel from their savings, and rather should expect everyone else to pay it for them!
I mean by the same logic Andy Murray is almost definitely traumatised after the Dunblane massacre at his school when he had to hide under a desk and probably witnessed his classmates killed. Should we pay for his fuel for him?

Nobody needs to die of cold. Energy companies should be prohibited from making profits. Cover costs, deliver warmth. Done.

You do realise that one day, sooner than you think, you will be a pensioner? Cancelling the £300 is fine with me as we have saved and have enough to pay our way. I feel sorry for anyone on the state pension of £220 per week, too much for pension credit. But if they have no other income it will be tight in the winter. I constantly hear 30 somethings moaning that there won't be a state pension when they get into their 60s/70s, yet they also moan about pensioners getting an increase too. Todays increases also affect the amount of pension you will get. The full state pension is about a third of the average wage, and half a full time wage at minimum wage, so not a fortune. Me and DH first started work, paying taxes and NI when we were 16, not 22 as many graduates do, and between us clocked up 98 years of paying our taxes. Our savings give us some security, that if we need care in future years, then we have some money to pay for it. The gov have just said they have cancelled the planned cap on care costs, so if they start to cut the pensions entitlement, and taxing our savings, and we run out of money, who us going to pay for our care?

Leave the bus pass alone! In England it is state retirement age, not 60, and it (a) takes at least some some otherwise unwilling older drivers off the road; (b) helps tackle loneliness by keeping people in the mix; takes people into our dying retail centres on weekdays. What’s not to like? It is a wonderful thing. The only change I would make is to also provide a free bus pass to anyone on JSA.

I would certainly agree that it seems a somewhat bizarre conclusion to draw that pensioners should not have to spend their savings because their parents were affected by the War!
Why would you think that?
I think there is a certain romanticism (that's not the right word but I can't think of another) about the elderly and this is an example of that. In what logical world should someone be entitled to sit on savings and be funded by the state, while other sectors of society cannot even think about saving in the first place?

100% agree with this.

You get a free bus pass at 60 in Merseyside, it can be used on the trains and ferry in Merseyside too. I have a disability bus pass that can also be used to get free transport throughout Merseyside.

Not the first world war they don't. It ended in 1918. Anyone born then would need to be at least 106

Who are these people, and do you have evidence to back this statement up?

They are clearly taking about the second world war that ended in 1945. But realistically you are talking about elderly people who were children or teenagers during the war. And quite a lot either had a parent die, return injured, or return traumatised.

Well indeed; the only able bodied people I know who chose not to work, and I count myself in that bucket sometimes, are making that choice because they don't need the income and can afford to support themselves. Those mythical people who chose not to work and life a life of luxury on benefits, before retiring on more than those who do/have worked, seem to hide themselves well. I am sure there are people who spend many years on benefits, but they are not living a life of luxury either now or in retirement. Or at least, not luxury as most of us would define it!

And even when dads did come home a whole generation of children were effectively living in single parent households.

Or without a parent at all, evacuation wasn't just about keeping children safe, it allowed their parents t twork, typically dad at war and mum on the home front.

Children evacuated from the channel islands had no contact for years.except an occasional red cross message of a single paragraph.

When my grandad came home my dad was on the street on his bike and of course grandad said to him, "hello, I'm your dad", my dad said, "No you are not, my Daddy is at the war" and cycled off.