Rachel Reeves has announced that winter fuel payments will only be paid to those on Pension Credit.nsion Credit

Labour the Nasty Party. Taking money off pensioners some who will now be unable to keep warm this winter. Cancelling the Care Cap now if you go into care they will take all of your hard-earned money, yet people who have paid nothing in will get looked after for free. The ones coming over on the dinghies will be kept nice and warm this winter you can be sure of that.

Marg75

Peartree, and also saying we should all leave our homes and go and sit in a warm hub all day!!

Sorry, I suggested warm hubs are available, thought it was helpful. They are popular herd as a way of socialising too.
Please ignore!

Here ....

keepingquiet

Oh come on- blaming Labour for the state the Tories left the economy in. At least she's being honest and telling the truth, unlike all those Tory liars,

Did you read my earlier post with questions and MaizieD's reply?

The "There is no money" is a myth.

This is not the way to stimulate the economy.

rosie1959

I find it odd that the supposedly caring Labour party are hitting pensioners who are just over the limit for benefits. They may be just managing but this kick on the teeth will not help.

So what would be your answer?

Give it to all pensioners even if they don’t need it? Very costly.
Means test it? Again costly to administer
Raise the UC credit bar? Then the next layer of missing out would complain.
Raise the SP? Then those pushed into tax would complain.
Of course they could abolish paying tax for Pensioners.
Any other suggestions?

ronib

Maybe stop the £10 at Christmas gift for pensioners too?

Absolutely, it is ridiculous. However I do hope they don’t take away my bus pass as I use it several times a week but as long as they keep the maximum fare amount I can cope.

J52

rosie1959

I find it odd that the supposedly caring Labour party are hitting pensioners who are just over the limit for benefits. They may be just managing but this kick on the teeth will not help.

So what would be your answer?

Give it to all pensioners even if they don’t need it? Very costly.
Means test it? Again costly to administer
Raise the UC credit bar? Then the next layer of missing out would complain.
Raise the SP? Then those pushed into tax would complain.
Of course they could abolish paying tax for Pensioners.
Any other suggestions?

I suppose they could have stopped the winter fuel payment for those on the higher tax rate but I don’t have a problem with what they’ve done.

Jane43

ronib

Maybe stop the £10 at Christmas gift for pensioners too?

Absolutely, it is ridiculous. However I do hope they don’t take away my bus pass as I use it several times a week but as long as they keep the maximum fare amount I can cope.

BP made $13.8bn (£11bn) in 2023, down from the record $27.7bn in 2022.

Shell profits were $28.2bn (£22.3bn) in 2023, down from $39.9bn in 2022 - the highest earnings in its 115-year history.

BP says its UK businesses account for less than 10% of global profits, while Shell makes about 5% of its revenue in the UK.

British Gas profits for 2023 increased 10-fold to £750m.

And posters suggest removing the £10 Christmas bonus? 🤔

What is happening with the Windfall Tax now we have a new Government?

When the £10 Xmas bonus began, in 1972, it bought quite a lot.

Now, it is relatively worthless, but apparently, to stop it, adjusting all the systems, would cost more than it would save.

As with the 25p “addition” when someone reaches the age of 80.

Isn't Rachel Reeves the poor lady who has trouble living on her salary? Or am I wrong?

Callistemon213

keepingquiet

Oh come on- blaming Labour for the state the Tories left the economy in. At least she's being honest and telling the truth, unlike all those Tory liars,

Did you read my earlier post with questions and MaizieD's reply?

The "There is no money" is a myth.

This is not the way to stimulate the economy.

Sadly, that's no comfort at all to those who will suffer from this bizarre decision.

I cannot imagine what Reeves must have been thinking in so explicitly targeting pensioners in her first foray as chancellor. I know that we're not popular among younger voters, those who struggle to pay their mortgages, or even to get onto the housing ladder, but do Labour not remember what happened to Theresa May with her social care 'death tax' proposal? This is politically insane...

Many younger folks have a granny who they won't want to see cold and suffering in the winter.

We're all wealthy "Boomers"!

I do understand that spiralling debt s not a good idea and a balance has to be found between creating money and inflation (I think!) but this isn't a good approach for a new Government, especially a Labour one.

I'm bemused.

Every Government blames the previous one for their financial decisions.

Jane43

ronib

Maybe stop the £10 at Christmas gift for pensioners too?

Absolutely, it is ridiculous. However I do hope they don’t take away my bus pass as I use it several times a week but as long as they keep the maximum fare amount I can cope.

It interesting that pensioners are given free travel, one might ask why? ( I do know the arguments for bus passes, so please don’t explain it)
The Government do not own the bus companies, so they pay for the passes. Which not all pensioners use. Why not save the costs and give more money to those pensioners on UC and those who are housebound and cannot make use of the bus pass?

GrannyGravy13

If this had been proposed and put into practice by the Conservatives all hell would have broken lose on GN, just saying…

It certainly would. No noise from certain quarters.

'The government' doesn't fund bus passes. They are funded by local, not national government. Taking away a bus pass would be a local government decision.

MaizieD

Callistemon213

keepingquiet

Oh come on- blaming Labour for the state the Tories left the economy in. At least she's being honest and telling the truth, unlike all those Tory liars,

Did you read my earlier post with questions and MaizieD's reply?

The "There is no money" is a myth.

This is not the way to stimulate the economy.

Sadly, that's no comfort at all to those who will suffer from this bizarre decision.

I cannot imagine what Reeves must have been thinking in so explicitly targeting pensioners in her first foray as chancellor. I know that we're not popular among younger voters, those who struggle to pay their mortgages, or even to get onto the housing ladder, but do Labour not remember what happened to Theresa May with her social care 'death tax' proposal? This is politically insane...

Many younger folks have a granny who they won't want to see cold and suffering in the winter.

I don’t think that it is politically insane, that is overegging the pudding, but I do think that she is boxing herself in by focusing on debt and accepting Tory fiscal rules, which has imo caused to a large extent (Brexit as well) the state we find ourselves in.

Reeves needs a change of fiscal focus and that in my opinion must be investment for growth.

She is certainly going part way there in her rhetoric but has chosen to be hidebound by Tory fiscal rules.

But before we go too overboard in criticism, I will wait for one year before I pass real judgement. The second budget, will I think begin to show the governments true colours so as we have this government for the next 5 years and hopefully longer, we have time to wait and see.

Why not save the costs and give more money to those pensioners on UC and those who are housebound and cannot make use of the bus pass

UC is only available to those of working age.

Why did anyone think Labour would care about pensioners? They never have done. Remember Gordon Brown’s 11 pence rise one year? Remember Gordon Brown’s tax raid on those people putting money into a pension savings pot? I have no idea why anyone is shocked. This is absolutely typical Labour behaviour. There are several other groups that Labour won’t go after, but pensioners have never been a high priority in Labour’s view. The triple lock won’t last longer than one year in my opinion. Watch this space.

we have time to wait and see.

Unless it's a very cold winter and we all get hypothermia.

Rachel Reeves is simply following Labour policy which is to the paymasters of the Labour party, and take the money from those who cannot and would not strike and cause mayhem.

I would also like to say that by focusing on one tiny (in monetary terms) part of the current spending review and then extrapolating that out to the entire economic policy is a tad unbalanced.

I thought that the pay awards were well done and not before time. But remember yesterday was only about the “current” spending plans that have been inherited from the Tories, whether they are affordable within the Tory fiscal rules - the answer is no, and how to try to get back to “balance”.

I’m not saying that I think this is the correct approach, but it is correct within the fiscal rules Reeves has chosen (so far) to abide by.

maddyone

Why did anyone think Labour would care about pensioners? They never have done. Remember Gordon Brown’s 11 pence rise one year? Remember Gordon Brown’s tax raid on those people putting money into a pension savings pot? I have no idea why anyone is shocked. This is absolutely typical Labour behaviour. There are several other groups that Labour won’t go after, but pensioners have never been a high priority in Labour’s view. The triple lock won’t last longer than one year in my opinion. Watch this space.

You are right, of course.

Labour have accused Rishi Sunak of failing pensioners and posing a threat to their living standards
6th June 2024

There will undoubtedly be deaths this winter from some pensioners who are poor and afraid to turn on the heating. I thought we’d left that behind years ago.

Merion

That wasn’t how the care cap was going to work. It was only a cap on the care aspect. It was not going to cover accommodation, meals and so on. It wasn’t retrospective. The clock would have started ticking from October 2025 even for someone in care before that. For most self-funders, the cap would have kicked in around year three. Many people going into care don’t survive that long. Without central funding the costs of administering the scheme and picking up the tab for care for those who reached the cap would have broken council budgets that are already under immense strain from the cost of social care. My county council currently spends 2.2 million a day on social care for just 16,000 people. I’d rather wait for a full review of the social care system.

What is really bugging me at the moment is how much money in sitting in the National Insurance Fund (NIF). This is a ring-fenced fund. NIC is paid in and contributory benefits are paid out. Some NIC is allocated to the NHS but the numbers that are in the annual report are net of that. Most of the fund goes on State Pension.

www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-insurance-fund-accounts/great-britain-national-insurance-fund-account-for-the-year-ended-31-march-2023#receipts-and-payments-account

The Christmas bonus is paid from this but not the Winter Fuel Allowance because the latter is not a contributory benefit. You do not have to have paid NIC to receive it. The Christmas Bonus cost £126 million at the last count.

Rachel Reeves did not give a costing in her speech for the saving made by withdrawing the WFA from people other than those entitled to Pension Credit. There are around 13 million State Pensioners altogther. About 1.5 million receive Pension Credit. I fully expected the WFA to drop back this year to £200 or £300 depending on age from the £500 or £600 it had been increased to during the energy crisiis. Assuming it would have done, I think Reeves reckons to save around 3 billion by withdrawing it.

Now take a look at the numbers in the NIF. It’s a long report but worth a read. There was over 72 billion sittng in the fund at 31 March 2023, an increase over the previous year and expected to rise again by 31 March 2024. At the time the last report was published, HMRC would have been aware of reductions in the rate of NIC and what pensions had risen by in April 2023 and were due to rise by in April 2024 so one would expect those numbers to have been taken into account when projecting a further increase in the balance. If there are going to be wage increases across certain sectors then the NIC yield will increase

72 billion is over three and half times the minimum balance required as a contingency without a Treasury grant to top it up.

I’ve asked my MP to table a question about why so much money is in the fund, copying my request to other MPs and Ministers, Shadows and spokespersons, because although the funds are ring-fenced, when times are tough it may be time to put a hand down the back of the sofa by way of a Statutory Instrument to divert some of the funds.

Thanks, Merion. This level of information is so useful in enabling others to grasp a really tricky subject. Context is important.

eazybee

Rachel Reeves is simply following Labour policy which is to the paymasters of the Labour party, and take the money from those who cannot and would not strike and cause mayhem.

That is entirely incorrect.