To think that with over 1million pensioners in poverty, removing the WFA makes Labour the nasty party, who tell blatant lies?

[TealTraybake]

And hypocritical lies at that. Just a few months ago Labour ‘vowed to be the party for pensioners’

‘Nearly 1 million people aged over 66 in the UK are living in deprivation, according to government statistics, the highest number since comparable records began.
Labour, which analysed figures from Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) records, has vowed to be the party for pensioners, with plans to insulate millions of homes and reduce energy bills. It has also “committed to retaining” the triple lock which guarantees annual rises to the state pension’

I understand the WFA should be means tested - but the current threshold is far too low. Food prices have gone up. Energy prices have gone up. Some pensioners need that WFA 🥺.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2024/apr/16/nearly-1m-uk-pensioners-deprivation-official-figures

Train drivers are pretty well paid for what’s, essentially, not a highly skilled job

Says you? And what about doctors or teachers?

It makes sense because for every child claiming this the school gets a pupil premium, it doesn't just benefit children suffering food scarcity.

@TomatoSandwiches does it? I thought that children who got free school meals in reception, 1, and 2 as part of it just being universal were classed differently to children who were eligible for free school meals due to household income?
The school doesn't get pupil premium for every child in reception to year 2 who claim their meal that everyone is entitled to do they?

Erm I would say being a doctor or nurse is much more highly skilled than a train driver, yes

We are not short of School places are we? How many children are on a waiting list to start school ? Maybe we should cut the free childcare as that would pay for more nurses bet that would have the labour voting mumsnetters screaming it isn't fair.

I'm sorry but it absolutely should be means tested. There are lots of pensioners who are fucking loaded. They don't need the allowance. Why should they have winter fuel allowance over and above young struggling families? Their pensions are already triple locked. It's ludicrous. Go to any nice pubs / restaurants and look who most of the clientele is. Not families or young people. They can't afford it. Older people have too much of the wealth and it needs to be redistributed a bit. I feel for those pensioners who are borderline but that's the same for young working families and people on other benefits who are borderline- and they are all means tested. The only reason that nobody has dared to means test it before is because we all know that pensioners vote. It doesn't mean it's right that they never share the burden of the dealing with the totally fucked up economy the Tories have left us with.

I can't wait until all the whining millennials are pensioners. I'm willing to bet they won't be in favour of treating old people like absolute shit then.

I dint think it’s the millennials who are whining however I’m pretty sure many of them don’t expect to see a state pension let alone a WFP or free prescriptions at 60 etc!

So £70 a month? Not exactly a crazy amount for an employer to contribute to energy bills while away from home and working.
The standing charges amount to around half of that so approximately £35 towards usage per month.
You really think that’s outrageous?

Why shouldn’t train drivers be paid well? They work unsociable hours, they’re responsible for huge cans of metal which are very often packed, probably over packed with people. They are, also, at risk of having someone jump in front of their trains every single day of the week. If the train drivers stop working watch the country grind to a halt.

If everyone thinks it’s so bloody cushy why not do the job? You could not pay me enough to do it

If £11,500 is considered rich then presumably the child benefit cap will be cut back to that at the budget as well, rather than continuing the increase that Jeremy Hunt gave at the last budget.

You're missing the people on basic state pension who are already scared about this. They're not making it up

Listen to more than what you see at the pub

Loads of jobs have ‘unsociable hours’ - they are very well paid for the role that they do

We are not short of School places are we? How many children are on a waiting list to start school ? Maybe we should cut the free childcare as that would pay for more nurses bet that would have the labour voting mumsnetters screaming it isn't fair.

We are certainly short of dc though as so many are choosing not to have them often because of costs.

👏 All of this. ^

It’s ultimately why Labour will change IHT laws because asset rich pensioners (who may be cash poor) are expecting the state to pay their energy bills. The money needs to be recouped somehow.

also it’s easy to say how will pensioners on just 12k cope. But how many own their own houses? How much do they have in savings? Because those factors would be taken into consideration for working age people to claim benefits. So it’s only fair it applies to pensioners. I know pensioners in my family have complained about the loss of WFA because they don’t have a big pension, but they have plenty in savings, so why shouldn’t that be used?

personally I think the housing market is a big issue behind this, ideally we’d get older people to downside so they could have a smaller home that is more manageable to heat and keep costs down. But stamp duty and all the other costs prevent people wanting to move. Labour should tackle this and also ensure the house building programmes they say they will enact will include suitable homes for older people.

Loads of jobs have ‘unsociable hours’ - they are very well paid for the role that they do

So what if they are paid well though? People should earn decent wages.

It’s ultimately why Labour will change IHT laws because asset rich pensioners (who may be cash poor) are expecting the state to pay their energy bills. The money needs to be recouped somehow.

agree

Not sure to be honest - would have to look into more detail at what was claimed for which periods and how much time she actually spends at the second home.

Yes, for every child that opts in for the FSM in yr1 & 2 the school gain extra funding.

And so they bloody should be.

This is impacting pensioners living on £12,000 who are pennies above the threshold for qualifying for pension credit. Subjecting these vulnerable and impoverished pensioners to what amounts to an act of performative cruelty is despicable and unforgivable.

God it's like Labour bingo. People are allowed to criticise Labour policies without the usual tired sloppy 'Torybot' trope.

Of course - everyone should have decent wages - but at a time of a ‘financial black hole’; why would you prioritise train drivers as a group who needs their salaries increased?

So why no winter fuel allowance for the disabled or very young children? They also suffer higher consequences from the cold and need a higher room temperature. Why should it be unique to anyone of pension age regardless of income more than other vulnerable members of society?

If £11,500 is considered rich then presumably the child benefit cap will be cut back to that at the budget as well, rather than continuing the increase that Jeremy Hunt gave at the last budget.

I don’t understand this logic? Why should the child benefit threshold be lowered because WFP is now means tested?

Do you think someone on £60k should qualify for means-tested benefits when someone on £12k doesn’t?