Petition to save the winter fuel payment

David49

It’s their system if you have spare cash you pay in into health insurance and pensions, at least they don’t have to worry much about winter fuel in Brisbane.

That's missing the point I think Indigo is making. Whether or not people have savings in older age can simply be a result of the amount they earned when younger, inheritance or luck in the housing market, but sometimes it is as a result of frugality borne of a fear of poverty - as Indigo says, going without expensive holidays etc. When this self-denial ends up pricing people out of pensions (or other things) that are given freely to those who spent as they earned, it can cause resentment.

It’s their system if you have spare cash you pay in into health insurance and pensions, at least they don’t have to worry much about winter fuel in Brisbane.

Like many others, I have mixed feelings about this; on the one hand, lucky people like me, financially secure with two pensions, or the wealthy, should not be getting the WFP. I give mine to Age Concern (sorry if that sounds like virtue signalling).

On the other hand, the threshold for Pension Supplement is far too low so that far too many pensioners are caught in a poverty trap and having to choose between eating and heating. In other words the whole system is in need of an urgent review.

David49 The Australian system seems a bit unfair to me, assuming that working Australians have to pay for state pensions for the elderly. Savings are often result from people going without and not splashing their cash on expensive holidays, gambling, cars, booze and fags.

I think that's a possibility, or at least that mitigation will be put in place. This has been so unpopular from all sides, and for all sorts of reasons. I appreciate that a U turn would be humiliating so soon after taking office, so I'm more inclined to think that something else will replace it, but time will tell.

There has to be a balance between keeping people warm and fed, and encouraging people to save what they can (or at least not disincentivising it). Being Chancellor is not a job I would relish. It's always robbing Peter to pay Paul, and whatever decisions are made are guaranteed to be unpopular with the losers.

I’ve signed it for my Mum, I feel a u turn by RR will be made at the budget.

Iam64

I won’t sign because so many pensioners do not need WFA. I would prefer the basic pension to be raised. Those of us with work or private pensions would pay more tax, to the benefit of others.
The main problem is we have the lowest pension in Europe and other countries like Australia. I’d sign a petition demanding increase in basic pension

My sister in Brisbane gets no state pension at all, they are not rich but savings are above the pension threshold.

I won’t sign because so many pensioners do not need WFA. I would prefer the basic pension to be raised. Those of us with work or private pensions would pay more tax, to the benefit of others.
The main problem is we have the lowest pension in Europe and other countries like Australia. I’d sign a petition demanding increase in basic pension

choughdancer

Having read this thread and people's opinions, I won't sign this petition, but would sign one to increase the level of income at which Pension Credit is paid.

Surely then there wouldn't be the problem of means testing for the WFA; it would have already have been calculated for the Pension Credit, and could be automatically paid to those on PC.

Pension Credit should be at the correct level I would hope that is done in the Budget,

Having read this thread and people's opinions, I won't sign this petition, but would sign one to increase the level of income at which Pension Credit is paid.

Surely then there wouldn't be the problem of means testing for the WFA; it would have already have been calculated for the Pension Credit, and could be automatically paid to those on PC.

Sorry I’m not signing it there’s too many pensioners getting it who have more than enough money - me for instance, those who really need it will get it it’ll be means tested I’ve always said it’s terrible that those with plenty of money have been getting it for years. Even millionaires - what a nonsense🤬

If you are on pension credits you will get WFA the rest of us don’t need WFA and the money will be spent on those that need help in other areas.
You just cannot defend giving handouts to those that don’t need them, there are plenty of other universal benefits that should be made means tested too.

keepingquiet

I won't be signing. We should all be on a pension that means we don't have to have 'extra' payments.

How long are you going to wait, till doomsday?

Honestly it's bad enough being a Waspi without this as well! My agegroup seems to draw the short straw on everything!

There's another petition here from Age Uk with 436,000 signatures. It's a blow for us. We're over the threshold but have enormous fuel bills (old house) and it really helped with the winter one. About 4,000 people a year die from cold apparently.

I think the means testing should not be based on whether or not people receive benefits but upon their overall income with the highest earners not receiving it and those under a certain income receiving it.

campaigns.ageuk.org.uk/page/154268/petition/1?ea.tracking.id=Website

A bit late to comment on this thread, but just a thought. Single pensioner households who are outside of the Pension Credit limit are going to be hard hit. Their homes need light and heating to the same degree as the homes of couples,but with only one pension income.
Living alone, there is no one to notice when difficulties set in, and the older pensioner tries to do without heating etc. There lies the danger that makes people vulnerable.

I think you are probably right that we are coming from basically the same place Doodledog.

We may have differing views on solutions but we both want the same end result! I'm going to ponder on universal benefits and higher taxes! 🙂

I'm sure we are coming from basically the same place, Madgran. The last thing I want is for anyone to be cold, or to only stay warm at the expense of other necessities. I am not suggesting cuts, but universal benefits with higher taxes, so that more of the benefits stay in the pockets of those with less.

I have outlined my objections to means-tests often, so won't bore on about them again, but I think that at least some of the divisions we are seeing so clearly just now are fuelled by perceived unfairnesses when it comes to who is given what.

That doesn't mean I don't understand that not everyone can afford to save. Of course I do (and have said so often). It is because I do understand that it is difficult for many people to get out of poverty that I object to systems that penalise them for trying.

Doodledog Madgran, but with respect I think it might come from a place of privilege? If you worked for minimum wage in a job you hated, but wanted to do the best you could to rise above the situation so prided yourself on being self-sufficient, you might feel differently if your neighbour got more than you for not working.

I understand your point. However some in a "place of privelege" NOW may well not have come from a "place of privelege"! They may well be acutely aware of those struggling which will definitely influence their thinking regarding chucking money like fuel allowance at people just because of their age!

Resentment with neighbours ...well yes but that is about the systems for allocating benefits; requirements regarding seeking employment etc etc ...it is not a justification for a universal fuel allowance.

Madgran77

HelterSkelter1

I would like to hear that the government will put pressure on the energy and water companies to reduce prices and stop these obscene payouts to company bosses and monitor dividends to share holders.

Yup Agree with that!

me too

HelterSkelter1

I would like to hear that the government will put pressure on the energy and water companies to reduce prices and stop these obscene payouts to company bosses and monitor dividends to share holders.

Yup Agree with that!

It's about aspiration. People don't want to work to have just what they 'need', particularly when someone else has decided on where that level sits, and will penalise them for getting above that level

I get that. But that is where a universal old age pension comes in regardless of income.

But in terms of additional benefits such as fuel allowance or even free bus fares I do think that income should be taken into account. I just don't see why the state should pay for someone's fuel purely based on their age! I think age is an irrelevant criteria in terms of additional benefits.

Aspiration...well some in life achieve a reasonable income and can live comfortably on it. Some do not. And it is not always because they have been careless with their money or even been able to make choices regarding their money. National money should benefit them to live at least safely (warmth) not benefit people who have quite enough to pay for their own warmth. (As an example)

Doodledog

Which is great in theory but less so on the sharp end.

I dont think it is an impossible to achieve theory though.

I would like to hear that the government will put pressure on the energy and water companies to reduce prices and stop these obscene payouts to company bosses and monitor dividends to share holders.

It's about aspiration. People don't want to work to have just what they 'need', particularly when someone else has decided on where that level sits, and will penalise them for getting above that level.

That's back to 'need' again, though. What does it mean, and who decides?

If the cut-off is having savings of £1000 and I have £990 because I've spent my decent wages as I got them, and you have £1010 because despite your lower income you have scrimped and saved to have a little bit extra. If I am given £200 it takes me to £1190, whilst you stay on £1010, simply because you tried to pull yourself out of poverty. Wouldn't you be resentful? Or would you smile and say you can't have 'needed' that extra money as you were able to save?