Winter fuel payments

[dearydeary]

I have just heard on the news that this is being discussed again and they are considering reinstating them.

While I think that people who are on a lower income (pension credit for example) may need additional help I do not think this should be a universal benefit any more.

It appears the government is still looking for votes. What about everyone else in society? Younger people at universities or just starting out? Individuals with disabilities?

Surely we need to be moving to a more means tested approach as the finances need rebalancing?

Where pensioner need help, I am happy to support but many older folk have benefited from good pensions, valuable house price increases and a stable employment market. This is not the situation for many of us any more.

Have I lost the plot?

Gotta love lazy identity politics where "group A = good” “group B = greedy blood suckers” and we have simple solutions to everything.

Something like a third of UK pensioners live below the fuel poverty threshold. most of those pensions are not eligible for pension credit/WFA, often due to being pennies or a couple of pounds over the threshold. The demographic most likely to be living in absolute poverty is older, single women.

Your mam got a boob job in the NHS? Really? For non therapeutic reasons? Where and when was this because 40 years ago it was difficult to get even post mastectomy reconstruction on the NHS and the wait list for therapeutic reduction was so long that older women rarely obtained the treatment.

Most of the “advantages” you describe applied disproportionately to men and to small numbers. Roughly 5% went to university, not the 40% currently going. They were disproportionately middle class or aspirational working class and male. Workplace and educational discrimination was widespread against women who were even barred from pension schemes until later in their working lives.

Selling off council houses wasn’t the problem. The problem was the failure to build and maintain a public housing stock for families on lower incomes and developing a half way decent rental model. I’d also say the size of the discount and advertising persuaded low income families to take out mortgages they couldn’t afford (when people talk about this they tend to forget just how many ended up in “privileged” repossession or left with properties in unsellable blocks).

Every generation experiences some crap and some benefits and every generation tends to play down its own advantages whilst playing up those of others.

So lets say we means test WFA to ensure at least the pensioners living in fuel poverty receive it. At that point for a small flat rate benefit its nearly always cheaper to just allocated it (as Osborne found with child benefit). You could offer an opt out/divert on it relatively cheaply for better off pensioners if politically expedient.

Labour needs get well away from the lazy identity based politics of the later 2010s which urban spads and lobbyists love so much and get back to focusing on what individuals need irrespective of their “group".

Slashing WFA was always going to lead to revolt and was directly at odds with Labour’s campaign messaging. Not least because in real world most people know older people struggling or just getting by, unlike MN were everyone over 60 apparently spends 50 weeks of the year on cruises and spends the other two whining at their children over Christmas arrangements.

Needs proper means testing, when I looked into it last autumn; currently an elderly couple with a huge £MM house can qualify, but other elderly couples in rented accommodation can’t have it.
Apologies if this changed, delete as required.

Ha! If you say so @BIossomtoes

Cutting the WFA was completely reasonable and it is a mistake to u-turn.

Sooner or later we (collectively) really are going to have to grow up and not stamp our feet when governments make necessary changes that are in the long term interests of the country.

We say we want better public services, but we complain when savings are made to fund them. We say we want fairness between the generations but we complain when anything is dones to redress the balance.

Of course that’s the case because eligibility is based on income not assets. Like tax.

That’s right and he enjoyed frittering it. No complaints from me. I’m just commenting on the winter fuel payments

Yep this.

No one claimed it. It was paid automatically.

I disagree. I'm very glad my wealthy parents have free bus passes. Without them they'd be driving into a busy city and trying to park, in their 80s. Their reflexes are not what they were and it's best for everyone if they are on the bus.
They would not, however, pay for a bus.

anyone who retired on just basic state pension before May 2016 would be on the old state pension rate even if they worked for 45 years and would be eligible for pension credit. The new state pension started for people retiring from May 2016 and is set at £2.60 above the pension credit cut off deliberately.

I agree with this; where have the grown ups gone of late, people need to resist the notion and the marketing that tells them, they- the individual, are the most important thing in the world and that there is no larger good than your own happiness. If people want the changes they say they do then people need to change their default setting from everything being about them!

My Dad is a riches to rags story so now lives in an over 65's social housing flat, he hardly pays any rent but actually thinks it is a bit absurd when you have endless young people homeless on the streets, without opportunities, without hope, he would rather that balance was reset and all ages were considered.

I don’t think hard working families paying exorbitant amount of taxes should support pensioners to heat their 5 bedroom house.
This should be means tested - not only based on income but also on property value.
Also, I do believe there should be incentives for people to downsize.

MH0084 · Today 13:23
I don’t think hard working families paying exorbitant amount of taxes should support pensioners to heat their 5 bedroom house.
This should be means tested - not only based on income but also on property value.
Also, I do believe there should be incentives for people to downsize.

Now there's an idea - a Property Tax! Not the local rateable value but a tax on property wealth.

Which is essentially means testing......

My monthly income is less than £1k. I’d like to see some of the PPs living on that. I’m mortgage free, but have water, gas, electricity, council tax, insurance, tv licence and car expenses as I’m nowhere near public transport. That £200 was part of my pension and at £1.68 over the limit for pension credit I feel really bitter about losing it. Some of the comments here are so upsetting. I doubt many pensioners have holiday homes in Spain etc.

Thanks for that, it really helps to insult my parents.

and Heaven forbid YOU should ever fall on hard times and struggle to pay bills and feed yourself and your kids ... because then you'll obviously be intentionally neglecting your children.

What a disgusting thing to say.

You implied they were poor from the offset, not that they were initially able to provide for their children and then fell on hard times. That would be different.

But if they struggled to feed themselves and the first child, what the hell were they thinking in having a further FOUR??

Just ignore those comments, generally from wealthy pensioners. Most know people who struggle and see the reality. I don’t think it’ll help Labour but I’m pleased if it helps you.

They’ve still got to develop code build and test the thing. Process changes are expensive in terms of time and I assume they outsource their IT to a very expensive third party who will charge a fortune. How much would they save I wonder. There should be some cost benefit thing done.

As someone on a state pension I don't agree it should be reinstated. My DH and I fortunately don't need it and none of our friends of a similar age do either.
I do think the threshold should be higher though, it can't be beyond the wit of HMRC do sort it out.

Looks like you will get a nice inheritance then. I assume you will be giving it away to poor people?

Yup, we all want better services, more benefits, etc., but when we say "pay more tax" to fund it, we mean "someone else" should pay, it's never us!! It's sheer hypocracy. We shovel monies into pensions and ISAs for the tax benefits, but then bemoan lack of funding for public services!