UK
Labour MPs face backlash for mean and unjust Winter Fuel cut – Simon Fletcher
By Simon Fletcher
It is, according to the Guardian’s editorial, ‘mean, unjust and politically inept.’ Labour’s decision to abolish the universal provision of pensioners’ winter fuel payments in favour of a means tested allowance that will automatically exclude millions of hard-pressed older people is the government’s first major controversy. Labour MPs face a huge backlash in their constituencies. It is no overstatement that for many this will set in stone how many people view the still-new government.
To means test the winter fuel payment will save just £1.4 billion. It is estimated that the number of people receiving the payment will fall from more than 11 million, to about 1.5 million, including many who are clearly in no sense well-off. The Chancellor’s decision will affect 86 per cent of pensioners – not just wealthiest but those on the basic state pension rate of £11,500 a year. In the North East local authority area of Gateshead, for example, it is estimated that over 31,000 pensioners are set to lose the allowance.
The winter fuel payment was a universal policy introduced by Gordon Brown that survived under the Tories. But it took Labour under Reeves and Keir Starmer just weeks to announce it will be means tested.
What is particularly insidious about the government’s imposition of a means test for winter fuel payments is that it has naturally and automatically opened the door to arguments against universalism. Having announced the policy in July as a measure to cut costs, the government has inevitably fallen into a narrative that ‘targeting’ – means testing – is preferable to universal provision. Keir Starmer himself said on Kuenssberg on Sunday: ‘the Winter Fuel Payments, are now to be targeted. They were untargeted before and I think everybody thought that wasn’t a particularly good system. So it needed to be targeted.’ On this he is wrong – very many people support a universal payment. At the meeting of the Parliamentary Labour Party on the Monday night before the vote, Rachel Reeves was reported as arguing that to vote against the government’s change was to reject the notion of means testing it. One MP was said to believe this line had traction, since ‘everyone in that meeting agrees it’s not right that millionaires get this payment.’ One new MP, Shaun Davies, has argued that the motion to reject the government plan would allow ‘rich pensioners like Alan Sugar to get the winter fuel payment.’ Across social media, supporters of the government are willingly using anti-universalist arguments. Ultimately that line of thought is of most use to the right of politics.
The problem with the narrative around ending the universal provision of the winter fuel payment is that the very same argument can be applied to any other universal benefit or service. If millionaires should not receive x benefit or service, what is the argument in favour of them receiving y or z? Logically, the same thing can be said about healthcare or concessionary travel exemptions like the Freedom Pass. The reason for universal provision is that it is the simplest mechanism to maximise a benefit for the largest number of people, binding in support for the welfare state and public services in the process. It eliminates the problem of people failing to claim for means-tested benefits and likewise avoids the trap of just failing to qualify for a benefit or service. The question of the rich in society is addressed in a different way, through progressive taxation. Universalism has been fought for by generations of labour movement activists and social reformers. The completely unnecessary ditching of the universal mechanism in this case – and the conscious use of ‘targeting’ and ‘means testing’ arguments – sets a dangerous ideological precedent for future debates as the government pursues its ‘tough choices.’
All of this comes at a time when quite contrary arguments have been building. For example, in London, Sadiq Khan has delivered universal free school meals in all primary schools, as has the Welsh Labour government. But through its actions over the winter fuel payment, Labour at a national level is legitimising the very arguments that are used against successful schemes like free school meals.
When a party of social democracy goes down the road of tearing up universal benefits it is bound to strengthen multiple damaging arguments. In the case of the winter fuel payments, a second insidious line of argument has broken out: many pensioners now feel pitted against those public sector workers who have recently won pay rises. It is now commonplace on the media and social media to hear the argument that workers have gained whilst pensioners’ universal payments have been targeted. The two have been counterposed in sections of the public debate, instead of a coalition being built. Again, that ultimately aids the right.
Given the government’s actions and its warnings about future choices in which things must get worse before they can get better, a broad campaign in defence of universal benefits and services is necessary.
In the process of getting its way on one universal benefit, the Labour government has done real harm.
- This article was originally published by Simon Fletcher’s Modern Left on Setpember 10th, 2024.
- You can become a subscriber of Modern Left to receive exclusive content and support the platform here; and follow Simon Fletcher on Twitter/X here.
I cannot support austerity – Ian Byrne on the Winter Fuel Payment Cut
By Ian Byrne MP
I have received more correspondence from worried pensioners in West Derby regarding this vote than any other in the last five years and this week I was their voice in Westminster, as I promised to be when elected.
The anger and fear among my constituents over the proposed changes to the winter fuel payment is unprecedented in my time as an MP, and the calls, letters and emails I have been receiving certainly reflect this, many from those already plunged into poverty because of the unfair pension changes by the Tories in 1995.
Labour has a massive job to build back our public services and communities, but this cannot be done on the backs of the poorest in society, continuing the inhumane work of the former Tory chancellor George Osborne. Let us not forget that Sir Michael Marmot’s research found that around 148,000 excess deaths are directly attributed to the impact of his austerity measures.
As the elected voice of my constituents in Parliament, I have a duty to reflect their views in Westminster. Here is a quote from just one of the pensioners I heard from before the vote – and one of several I included in my recent letter to the Chancellor, urging her to change her mind on means testing the Winter Fuel Payment:
“I am messaging you because the fuel allowance has been cancelled by the Labour government. It’s a disgrace and very vindictive and hurtful. My wife and I are pensioners… it’s not OK at all when the allowance goes to our winter bills. Please can you help? It seems pensioners are easy pickings, we have no voice. I do hope you can help.”
This is simply devastating.
But there is another way to rebuild our country back in a fairer and more equitable way. The Common-Sense policy group recently published a detailed set of alternative proposals to austerity which is eminently achievable – and not on the backs of those already struggling.
The ending of the winter fuel payment for so many people is something I would have fought if it had been proposed by a Conservative Government. I am genuinely so sad and sorry that it is a Labour Government choosing to implement this policy now.
This significant policy change was not in the manifesto of change I stood on and I am very aware that the pensioners who voted for me in West Derby feel bewildered and deeply betrayed by this political choice.
I cannot morally support austerity when I see the damage it has done to my class and communities.
I cannot choose to wilfully harm some of our most vulnerable people in my constituency – so many of whom have contributed so much to our communities throughout their lives.
I remember, too, the words of Gordon Brown, who introduced the winter fuel payment after the 1997 election, because he was “simply not prepared to allow another winter to go by when pensioners are fearful of turning up their heating, even on the coldest winter days”.
I have also signed an Early Day Motion in Parliament, laid down by the Labour MP for Poole, Neil Duncan-Jordan, which called on the Government to undertake full impact assessments and give full consideration to those just over the Pension Credit entitlement threshold before making the proposed changes to the Winter Fuel Allowance.
And earlier this week I wrote to the Chancellor on behalf of my West Derby constituents, urging her to change her mind. You can view this letter below:
I urge the Government to have a rethink even at this late hour and withdraw this plan.
The End Fuel Poverty Coalition has warned that there could be fatal consequences from the scale of those economising on heating and the risk of a record increase in excess deaths as a result. Likewise, National Energy Action argues that many people were too scared to turn their heating on, for fear for of getting deeper into debt, no matter the impact on their physical or mental health.
Furthermore, I agree with Age UK when they say it is “alarming,” that more than 1.5 million older people are already cutting back or stopping their social care across the UK because they cannot afford the cost. This is “potentially disastrous” for an older person with care needs as cutting back or stopping care in this way increases the chances of serious ill health and injury.
I also understand that an Age UK petition launched in August 2024, calling to save the Winter Fuel Payment, has already received in the region of 500,000 signatures.
I agree with the range of campaigners in advocating for a substantial comprehensive package to help address pensioner poverty, including fuel poverty, and will continue to call for urgent Government action – including measures to bring down energy bills through public ownership of energy (as per the recently announced Great British Energy Bill as a first step).
Further to this, I believe we need to reform social security and establish a new social care system that is fair, free at the point of use and available to everyone when they need it.
I will continue to advocate, in Parliament and beyond, that everyone deserves a decent retirement free of financial stress and insecurity.
• Ian Byrne is the MP for Liverpool West Derby.
• You can follow him here on x/twitter.
• If you support Labour Outlook’s work amplifying the voices of left movements and struggles here and internationally, please consider becoming a supporter on Patreon.
No comments:
Post a Comment