To resent the U-turn on winter fuel allowance?

[BlueEyedStarling]

Perhaps I'm existing in a bubble, but all of the pensioners I know, are pretty well off, or comfortable, at least. I live and have older family in the South East, but my dad and his elderly partner, live in the North. Literally, all of them say they dont need the WFA, but happily accept it regardless and shouted from the rooftops when it was taken away from them. Just how long can the working age population keep paying for this increasing, triple-lock section of society who are, as a whole, the wealthiest amongst us? Personally, we fell through the gaps of being able to receive any child benefit (only just!), but have always been willing to accept that we didn't need it and therefore shouldn't have it. Is it that our middle-aged generation just dont shout as loudly about things that affect us? I do want to add that I am very aware that there are many pensioners who should be in receipt of the WFA and that the cut off was too low. Also, that our pensioners fair pretty badly in comparison to much of Europe. It seems criminal that it can't be means tested to benefit those who really do need it.

You wouldn't believe the sheer number of people doing all kinds of financial and legal gymnastics to avoid care home fees. Just because you don't doesn't mean that no one does.

Rubbish you were told about the changes to pension ages unless you lived in the Moon! The first announcement was in 1991, 1995,2007,2011, 2013! So stop the nonsense that I you had no notice of the changes!

And yet 15% are in poverty

I think it depends on the details of the policy. I am a pensioner I don't need the winter fuel allowance but some people just above the threshold do.
I supported the policy to take it away. But the cut off was much too blunt.
So I support raising the threshold so more people can claim it. But keeping it means tested so those who won't need it are not eligible

It’s funny that it’s too expensive to means test benefits for pensioners, but not for parents.

I‘m with you OP. The only pensioners I know are well off. They’re all on cruises, west end shows, out for meals and rubbing my face in it. I will be working until I’m dead as won’t be able to afford to retire as I haven’t got the advantage of the lifetime pension that kicks in at 55 and I will probably need to make the sandwiches for my wake.

I would. Lots of them pay you to help them, don’t they?

The problem is whether we can afford both universal WFA and child benefit for bigger families than 2. If we cannot afford both, then I think child benefit is more important. And they have put that on the back burner. Playing old people off against children is nasty politics.
Elderly who need it should get it but if they want to play this well politically, absolutely there should be an obligation to repay and opt in, just like child benefit.

Fantastic job of not resenting anything at all there. Would have maybe worked better if you had not mentioned offering their son (who is not your husband) money when he has a professional job and is not short of money. Would you have been more or less not resentful if they were offering your husband money?

I agree. I’d very much like to see the two child cap lifted.

@PhilippaGeorgiou
Yes, all those old people who have worked all their lives and now struggle to manage should definitely be a lot more ambitious and self-reliant. they wouldn't be trapped in poverty. It's a real shame we closed the pits, because we could have sent the pensioners down to learn about ambition and self-reliance.
You seem to have completely misunderstood my point, which is that means-testing is a way of keeping people down, as the minute they earn more than what someone else decrees they 'need' they are penalised, so are better off not working overtime or paying into a pension. IMO people should be able to better their lives and not find themselves worse off than if they hadn't.

I am in no way saying that pensioners are not (or have not been) ambitious and/or self-reliant. My very point is that if they were, and now have slightly more than they 'need' they are kept in their place, which is at a subsistence level. Heaven forbid they get more than they 'need'. I feel the same about young people - it's means-testing I object to, and I am not casting aspersions on anyone's lifestyles, so there is no need for the sarky comments about opening the pits.

I know pensioners in a mixture of financial circumstances. DM was on pension credit and lived like a church-mouse; WFA was crucial to her. Our minted neighbours not so much.
I keep hearing that means testing will cost too much to administer, but really? We've managed very well with CB. Lots of benefits and allowances (DLA / PiP, Attendance Allowance, Carer's Allowance etc) are on an application basis, maybe WFA could be too?

The point shes making is that they arent short of money s they have money to lend out, but are bemoaning the removal of WFA.

So the loaning of the money is perfectly relevant

Nope, not my work at all. But I see the after-effects of what has been done by solicitors and financial advisers once they've died, via the trusts, wills, probate, etc., or when a property has been sold and the beneficiaries/children find they've capital gains tax pay on their "share" when the parental property was put into joint names to help avoid care home fees, but no longer eligible for main residence relief for CGT.

My work is tax planning advice, not care home fee avoidance advice and when clients want that, I direct them to their solicitor or IFA, through gritted teeth (along with warnings as to the consequences of things not working out as they think they may, i.e. the person dying before going into a care home making the whole thing pointless and more expensive!). Luckily it's outside the scope of what I'm allowed to do under the terms of my professional indemnity insurance and my accountancy body's practising certificate and I'll never start such a conversation or pre-empt it, in fact it's in my terms of business as one of several specific services I don't undertake! I'm busy enough with tax planning to get involved with benefits etc.

And 30% of children in the UK live in poverty...

The ones in poverty will be entitled to WFA

Agreed- they need to ditch the triple lock too.

Indeed!

And the point is no one should be in poverty young or old. Not playing it off against each other but all generations should be suppprted. They seem to manage it in Europe.

I agree with you.

But boomers are 60-78. You are Gen X.

Agreed. Nobody wins a race to the bottom.

I think you misunderstood the post. Boomers were born 1945 to 1964.

BowlandBillow I watched the same programme.I think there were a lot of issues not discussed.The WFA was introduced back in the 90s by Gordon Brown .It is unreasonable for RR and this govt to take it away in one stroke.I do not like Nigel Farage ,but his point that WFA ,is a similar cost as the migrants coming here illegally is the elephant in the room.Also that KS is running scared that his party would be usurped by them if not retintroduced. Also there is 3 billion given to Ukraine . Billions more on Nuclear weapons .Pensioners are largely despised by KS ,even though they are more likely to vote.PIP payments to disabled people will also be cut.Many pensioners have started work when 14 or 15 and missed out on Uni ,worked hard and built up a savings and pension pot.

@Greenartywitch

I never understand why so many people in this country want a race to the bottom when it comes to supporting elderly and vulnerable or sick people.

But one of those things in your list is not like the others. Supporting the vulnerable or sick, yes. The poor too.

But calls to tax or borrow more to give to old people just because of their age involve questions of intergenerational fairness.

This generation of old people have paid far less in taxes than they will cost, and will stick those that come after with the bill.

I agree OP and my pensioner parents and their friends are livid. They've said all along they don't need the money and they were perfectly fine with it stopping, they think there are plenty of young families need the money more right now.

A few loud voices and they've caved :-( so disappointed that they didn't have more backbone.

Apologies. Clearly I’ve maligned you.