U turn on winter fuel payments- is it a good move?

Allira

I've just been reading indignant posts on Facebook from someone who says he's a musician and doesn't earn £34,999 pa, nor do the check out operators in supermarkets.

The cut-off point had to be someone and the average salary of working people in the UK is £37,430 so obviously some will earn less than that or it would not be an average.

Seems they can't win whatever they do!

I think we live in angry times. It seems some people can't be happy unless they have something to be angry about - they should be warned it won't do their blood pressure much good.

Lfranc72

The anger and ‘I told you so’ comments on social media is astounding. The tories 14 years of austerity never attracted so much vitriol. I admit I was mystified by their decision but we voted them in so let’s see what comes next. True I am a working class Labour supporter but in the interest of keeping out the tories I have been voting for our local LibDem.

That's politics for you! So many people are guided by their base instincts rather than their brains - and some politicians know exactly how to appeal to base instincts.

someone somewhere

I've just been reading indignant posts on Facebook from someone who says he's a musician and doesn't earn £34,999 pa, nor do the check out operators in supermarkets.

The cut-off point had to be someone and the average salary of working people in the UK is £37,430 so obviously some will earn less than that or it would not be an average.

Seems they can't win whatever they do!

I don’t know why the decision keeps being referred to as a U turn. It’s a populist concession to benefit less well off pensioners, not a U turn. The policy hasn’t been reversed. In future it will be means tested. That may not seem important now, but it will be.

The anger and ‘I told you so’ comments on social media is astounding. The tories 14 years of austerity never attracted so much vitriol. I admit I was mystified by their decision but we voted them in so let’s see what comes next. True I am a working class Labour supporter but in the interest of keeping out the tories I have been voting for our local LibDem.

Although I wasn’t dependent on the WFA I did find that this winter I was more careful about my use of gas and electricity, something that I should have been doing anyway. I hope that, with its reinstatement I’ll continue to be careful for the sake of the environment. As a lifetime Labour voter I still can’t get my head round why they removed the WFP because it has overshadowed all of the good things they have done eg free breakfasts for schoolchildren, money being allocated to fix pot holes etc etc.

What sort of a Labour Government starts out its programme by kicking the elderly ?

Too right they have to do a u turn.

I think it is right, because the alternative presented - applying for help via Pension Credit - is almost impossible to do.
It's a lot easier to apply for Universal Credit than Pension Credit, and yet many of the people who need the latter are cognitively or visually impaired. Even if you're not, it's still jolly difficult. And it was a completely unnecessary own goal by a new government.

I think we should be looking at the wider UK poverty statistics.
commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn07096/#:~:text=Some%20groups%20are%20more%20likely,and%20Pakistani%20(47%25)%20households.
Nobody would want anybody living in poverty, of course. However there are many other groups who are in poverty as well, and there is a distinct lack of magic wands. If the basic state pension was raised to a higher level so that there was no need for means testing of any elements, many pensioners who also have occupational pensions would be much better off than many younger working adults, who generally have more financial commitments. That isn’t fair, surely.

We will be grateful to receive the winter heating allowance but feel it should be given in January. The reason being is that is when the big bills start to come through and also it is not to buy the grandchildren more Christmas presents! Our neighbour was up in arms when she didn't get the WHA as she wanted to spend it on the grandchildren. We scrimped and saved to insulate our house properly and so glad we did as losing the WHA made a huge difference to us and we found ourselves scrimping again. Friends have also had to cut down to cover the extra cost of winter heating.

I understand that giving universal benefits to groups of people, in this case the elderly, is a less costly way to distribute money than targeting certain sections of the population. The new option for this benefit at least removes those who really do not need the £200/300 p.a. I personally feel that the payment is still being given to too many pensioners, I would prefer the money to be targeted at those in fuel poverty, families with young children who need warm accommodation, not me who can more easily cope without putting my central heating on (usually less than 5 times a year).

IMO all benefits should be taxed. AA, DLA, PIP, WFA, the lot. If ur under the personal allowance it wouldn’t affect u and children who receive benefits in their own name will be covered. Very high earners can claim AA and PIP on top of their income untaxed. Then the rich will have to pay some or all back. Simples.

Of course there are other factors but even the Government’s own report shows the UK to be low on the list.

researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN00290/SN00290.pdf

Without private pension provision which many, particularly women, do not have, the State Pension alone is inadequate.

Private pension schemes are extremely vulnerable to market turbulence as we saw under Truss.

Our state earning related system was abolished in 2016. Younger people will not have the opportunity to build a second state pension.

One change I would like to see is that the cap on contribution years be lifted. I believe that if you work and pay NIC for 50 years you should be paid a State Pension which reflects that.

Exactly PoliticsNerd
According to the international comparison of pensions from the House of Commons Library:

‘However, the relative position of pensioners converges if income from all sources is considered. Income from occupational and personal pensions is a relatively important source of pensioner income in the UK, in contrast to many other countries where state provision (financed either through social insurance contributions or general taxation) is dominant.
OECD estimated that 14.5% of people aged 66 and over in the UK were living in relative income poverty in 2022. This was the 14th highest rate among 34 OECD countries for which data was available for 2019-2022.’

That’s why means testing is essential.

Pension adequacy is not just about the amount of the pension. Pension levels and benefits vary significantly across Europe due to differing economic conditions, social welfare policies, and cost of living.

To argue that it is the lowest State Pension in Europe you would need to look at far more than just the pension amount.

Allira

^Would that they had changed the name, then it might now be accepted for what it really is, a general supplement to what is arguably the lowest State Pension in Europe.^
👏👏👏

And now it’s a hot button topic where anyone with income of more than £35,000 is deemed a pariah and people like journalist Lewis Goodall are having a wonderful time stirring up intergenerational warfare.
It is so unpleasant. Throwing your Granny under a bus seems to be quite a theme in the media now.

Divide-and Rule basically.

Target one group or demographic that has been disadvantaged by a failing system, rather than deal with the system.

Then we can all fight among ourselves instead of questioning why there is such rampant economic inequality, stagnating wages, unaffordable fuel charges, and an inadequate state pension.

Would that they had changed the name, then it might now be accepted for what it really is, a general supplement to what is arguably the lowest State Pension in Europe.
👏👏👏

And now it’s a hot button topic where anyone with income of more than £35,000 is deemed a pariah and people like journalist Lewis Goodall are having a wonderful time stirring up intergenerational warfare.
It is so unpleasant. Throwing your Granny under a bus seems to be quite a theme in the media now.

www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/2025/06/winter-fuel-payment-criteria-confirmed/

An explanation on here, also a warning that the scams have already started.

Do not respond to any emails telling you to claim for the WFA.

Nobody other than in the occasional debate or think tank gave a thought to this issue for 28 years until Reeves opened the worm can.

£200 or £300 would drop quietly into the household bank account(s) around November time and we thought “that will help towards the gas bill or a few Christmas treats” - both of which would incur taxes.

And now it’s a hot button topic where anyone with income of more than £35,000 is deemed a pariah and people like journalist Lewis Goodall are having a wonderful time stirring up intergenerational warfare.

As I wrote upthread, someone with an income of £35,000 and an average house is already paying in the region of £7,000 of that back in income tax and council tax.

To have an net income of £28,000 after 50 years of work, paying into occupational pension schemes and NIC isn’t a huge amount when www.retirementlivingstandards.org.uk/ is saying a single person needs to spend over £31,000 a year to have a moderately comfortable retirement.

In a report on Fuel Poverty in March 2010, the House of Commons Energy and Climate Change Committee concluded that, as a means of tackling fuel poverty, the Winter Fuel Payment was unfocused and poorly-targeted.

As a means of tackling fuel poverty, the case for Winter Fuel Payments is weak. Its payment is unfocused and not targeted on people in or near fuel poverty. However, as a universal means of supplementing pensioner incomes, which is easily understood and easy to pay, the political case for the retention of Winter Fuel Payments is strong. _However, it would be more intellectually honest to rename the benefit; concede that it a general income supplement_; and stop accounting for it as a fuel poverty measure.

The Labour Government did not respond before the 2010 General Election, but in its response published on 25 October 2010 the new Government stated, in relation to the Committee’s recommendation:

We accept that the Winter Fuel Payment is not solely a fuel poverty measure - it also provides reassurance to older people that they can afford to keep warm in the winter months when heating bills are higher. Each winter the Winter Fuel Payment helps over 12.3 million older people in around 9 million households with fuel bills, at a cost of around *£2.7 billion. We therefore think that "Winter Fuel Payment" is an appropriate name for this benefit and there are no plans to change it.

* it is now less than that, around 1.8 billion since the equalisation of the SP age for men and women.

Would that they had changed the name, then it might now be accepted for what it really is, a general supplement to what is arguably the lowest State Pension in Europe.

RSALLAN2002

A couple earning just under £70k (and £35k each) will each get the allowance. Indeed, one could be making £100k and the other just under £35k and the poorer one would get it. Doesn't make sense.

That could be because we are beginning to recognise people as individuals, not accessories to another person.

Poppyred there is no publicly available record or credible statement indicating that the Labour Party in the UK explicitly stated they would "never" change the Winter Fuel Allowance. If you know of one you really should be quoting it to show your posts are not simply a biased rant.

Political parties often review and adjust benefit policies over time, and proposals or announcements regarding eligibility criteria—such as limiting the allowance to pensioners on Pension Credit—are typically communicated through official channels, policy documents, or campaign statements not through the view of biased media or biased opinion.

I hope they are going to use this method on tax loopholes too. First taking them away but, where it is relevent leaving them for the poorest. Then, after doing the work necessary, returning them in a way which helps those around middle/mean income.

We need to help this middle tier. This is where inclusive growth comes from, not the exclusive growth of the very rich. A flourishing middle class contributes to social and cultural vibrancy. It often emphasizes mobility, broad-based development, and societal stability. Just what we need.

I think that’s fair. Some couples split bills, so the one on a low income will get help with their share, and the other will lose theirs in tax. The lower paid partner will have been taxed in his (or her) own right, so should get the allowance in their own right.

If they are happy to live with a billionaire who splits bills 50/50 that’s their choice 😉

It is to be £35 k threshold on individuals. Everyone will get the money, but HMRC will take it back through income tax if you earn over the threshold. So if you only have a state pension but your partner is a billionaire his will be clawed back yours won't. Obviously an extreme example.

Poppyred

Chocolatelovinggran

Forgive me returning,Poppyred, but I did ask for some evidence to support your assertion that this change was due to Reform,other than your beliefs that "you'd be a fool to think otherwise " and " don't be fooled by them".
These are your thoughts, to which you are, of course, entitled, but with no back up in fact, that is all they are.
I might think differently, but I'm not sure that defines me as a fool.

I didn’t call you a fool Chocolatelovinggran. (Please read my previous post again.) Labour took away the WFP a few weeks after coming to power and have consistently stated that they would not reverse this decision. When the Reform party formed and became very popular in the polls and stated that they would reverse this decision if they came to power, it stands to reason that they had to do something! Politicians only care about their standing in the polls, that’s what I meant by ‘don’t be fooled’, and of course it is only my opinion. They’re not going to own up to that, are they? 😁

Nobody is being fooled. Labour is responding to a massive backlash, which is what democracy is supposed to be about - responding to the will of the people!