TUC congress: delegates slam Labour move to steal winter fuel payment
There are tensions among union leaders about how to relate to the Labour government
Delegates during the first day of the TUC congress (Picture: Socialist Worker)
By Thomas Foster in Brighton
Sunday 08 September 2024
SOCIALIST WORKER Issue
Keir Starmer said Labour is “going to have to be unpopular” over its decision to snatch winter fuel payments from ten million pensioners.
It certainly was unpopular among delegates at the TUC union federation conference, which began in Brighton on Sunday.
Starmer said Labour MPs should back the move in a key vote on Tuesday night.
Sophie, an NEU education union delegate, told Socialist Worker that Labour “is focusing on the wrong things”. “It should be focusing on taxing the rich and corporations rather than going for pensioners,” she said.
“I think this is only going to be the first round of cuts—I can envision more.”
She added, “Labour says the economy is in a bad place after Tory governments, but I feel like that’s an excuse. It’s not prioritising important things such as the cost of living crisis—energy prices are going up and Labour’s just increased the cap on energy bills.
“It’s going to impact workers, not those who have big businesses or inherited money.”
Sophie argued that Labour “has gone down the wrong path to start off with”. “You’ve heard Keir Starmer say it’s going to be a difficult budget in October,” she said. “But does it need to be difficult?
“Or is he just pandering to the rich while hurting the working class who are already struggling?”
Michelle, a PCS union delegate, told Socialist Worker, “In my workplace there are people going to foodbanks who haven’t got enough money to properly feed the kids, who are finding childcare expenses hard to afford.
“You are going to get people who fall outside of the means-tested criteria but are still struggling. It should be a universal payment.”
Why we must oppose racism and war at the TUC Congress
Read More
Michelle said she saw parallels between Keir Starmer and former Labour prime minister Tony Blair. “Blair made all these promises but then he was just a watered-down version of Margaret Thatcher,” she said.
“My fear is that we might have a similar sort of thing. Politics seems to be going in the direction of ‘If we sit in the middle of the road, we’ll get the most votes’. But that’s not what politics should be about.”
This anger and disappointment among many delegates finds an echo at the top of the unions.
But there are differences about how to relate to the Labour government. The TUC and wants to work closely with Labour, relishing a “seat at at the table” after 14 years of Tory rule. That means giving Labour the benefit of the doubt based on illusions in “social partnership”—not campaigning for more from Starmer’s government.
Paul Nowak, the TUC general secretary, gave the most muted criticism of Labour at a press conference on Sunday morning. He did have “real concerns about the cuts to winter fuel allowance”
But he had begun by repeating Starmer’s excuse, saying, “The government has been left with a really toxic economic legacy by previous Tory governments.”
He didn’t make demands on Labour, but said he hoped it would do the right thing in the end. “I hope that we’ll go into the budget in October with the chancellor setting out what support is going to give to those pensioners,” he said.
“I don’t want any pensioner going into the winter frightened to turn on the heating. It means in the budget making real the aspiration that those with the broadest shoulders do the heaviest lifting.”
Nowak suggested taxing capital gains—profits from selling shares and property—at the same rate as income.
Starmer’s speech: Labour is now promising misery instead of change
Read More
“I don’t see why somebody in a supermarket pays a higher effective rate of tax than someone who derives income from renting flats or from shares,” he said.
Unite union general secretary Sharon Graham was much more open in her criticism—and made demands on Starmer. She said that it was the “wrong choice” and the government needed to be “big and brave enough” to admit it had made a mistake.
“We think it’s wrong that the government has made a choice to cut the winter fuel allowance,” Graham said.
She argued that Labour is “leaving the very rich and wealth untouched” and called for a wealth tax.
Tensions between Labour and Unite this early into the Starmer’s government show how little it’s offering working class people. Only a fightback will force Labour to shift.
PCS general secretary Fran Heathcote said, “I can see a situation where, if Labour continues along the line that it is heading, there will be a real backlash. And that could take the form of industrial action.”
A motion from the PCS union argues that public sector wages have decreased by an average of 1.5 per cent annually since 2011. It calls for a pay restoration to be “a key feature of our campaigning with the new government”
An RMT regional organiser slammed Labour’s move. “The super rich trying to blame teachers getting a 5.5 percent pay rise for pension cuts is sick,” he said.
He argued that Labour “is robbing one working class person to help another”. “But we can’t let it divide us. We need to fight this Labour government. Not by appealing to a better nature but by calling strikes.”
It will take turning such words into action to hit back at Labour’s pro-boss policies.
Keir Starmer said Labour is “going to have to be unpopular” over its decision to snatch winter fuel payments from ten million pensioners.
It certainly was unpopular among delegates at the TUC union federation conference, which began in Brighton on Sunday.
Starmer said Labour MPs should back the move in a key vote on Tuesday night.
Sophie, an NEU education union delegate, told Socialist Worker that Labour “is focusing on the wrong things”. “It should be focusing on taxing the rich and corporations rather than going for pensioners,” she said.
“I think this is only going to be the first round of cuts—I can envision more.”
She added, “Labour says the economy is in a bad place after Tory governments, but I feel like that’s an excuse. It’s not prioritising important things such as the cost of living crisis—energy prices are going up and Labour’s just increased the cap on energy bills.
“It’s going to impact workers, not those who have big businesses or inherited money.”
Sophie argued that Labour “has gone down the wrong path to start off with”. “You’ve heard Keir Starmer say it’s going to be a difficult budget in October,” she said. “But does it need to be difficult?
“Or is he just pandering to the rich while hurting the working class who are already struggling?”
Michelle, a PCS union delegate, told Socialist Worker, “In my workplace there are people going to foodbanks who haven’t got enough money to properly feed the kids, who are finding childcare expenses hard to afford.
“You are going to get people who fall outside of the means-tested criteria but are still struggling. It should be a universal payment.”
Why we must oppose racism and war at the TUC Congress
Read More
Michelle said she saw parallels between Keir Starmer and former Labour prime minister Tony Blair. “Blair made all these promises but then he was just a watered-down version of Margaret Thatcher,” she said.
“My fear is that we might have a similar sort of thing. Politics seems to be going in the direction of ‘If we sit in the middle of the road, we’ll get the most votes’. But that’s not what politics should be about.”
This anger and disappointment among many delegates finds an echo at the top of the unions.
But there are differences about how to relate to the Labour government. The TUC and wants to work closely with Labour, relishing a “seat at at the table” after 14 years of Tory rule. That means giving Labour the benefit of the doubt based on illusions in “social partnership”—not campaigning for more from Starmer’s government.
Paul Nowak, the TUC general secretary, gave the most muted criticism of Labour at a press conference on Sunday morning. He did have “real concerns about the cuts to winter fuel allowance”
But he had begun by repeating Starmer’s excuse, saying, “The government has been left with a really toxic economic legacy by previous Tory governments.”
He didn’t make demands on Labour, but said he hoped it would do the right thing in the end. “I hope that we’ll go into the budget in October with the chancellor setting out what support is going to give to those pensioners,” he said.
“I don’t want any pensioner going into the winter frightened to turn on the heating. It means in the budget making real the aspiration that those with the broadest shoulders do the heaviest lifting.”
Nowak suggested taxing capital gains—profits from selling shares and property—at the same rate as income.
Starmer’s speech: Labour is now promising misery instead of change
Read More
“I don’t see why somebody in a supermarket pays a higher effective rate of tax than someone who derives income from renting flats or from shares,” he said.
Unite union general secretary Sharon Graham was much more open in her criticism—and made demands on Starmer. She said that it was the “wrong choice” and the government needed to be “big and brave enough” to admit it had made a mistake.
“We think it’s wrong that the government has made a choice to cut the winter fuel allowance,” Graham said.
She argued that Labour is “leaving the very rich and wealth untouched” and called for a wealth tax.
Tensions between Labour and Unite this early into the Starmer’s government show how little it’s offering working class people. Only a fightback will force Labour to shift.
PCS general secretary Fran Heathcote said, “I can see a situation where, if Labour continues along the line that it is heading, there will be a real backlash. And that could take the form of industrial action.”
A motion from the PCS union argues that public sector wages have decreased by an average of 1.5 per cent annually since 2011. It calls for a pay restoration to be “a key feature of our campaigning with the new government”
An RMT regional organiser slammed Labour’s move. “The super rich trying to blame teachers getting a 5.5 percent pay rise for pension cuts is sick,” he said.
He argued that Labour “is robbing one working class person to help another”. “But we can’t let it divide us. We need to fight this Labour government. Not by appealing to a better nature but by calling strikes.”
It will take turning such words into action to hit back at Labour’s pro-boss policies.
Government 'picking pockets of pensioners' by cutting winter fuel payments, says Unite boss
Sky News
Sun 8 September 2024
Firebrand union leader Sharon Graham has told Sky News that Chancellor Rachel Reeves is guilty of "picking the pockets of pensioners" by cutting winter fuel payments.
The leader of the Unite union was speaking on the opening day of the TUC conference in Brighton, where she spearheaded demands for a wealth tax on millionaires to fund restoring the winter cash for pensioners.
"Britain is in crisis, and we need to make very, very different choices," said Ms Graham.
"We're calling on Labour not to pick the pockets of pensioners, but to have a wealth tax on the biggest and richest 1% in society."
She said her proposal would create £25 billion, more than enough to fill the £22 billion "black hole" blamed by the chancellor and Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer for the cuts.
"Job's done, let's move on and change society," she added.
"We're calling for the government to think again. This issue isn't going to go away. We're coming up to winter. People are going to be freezing cold.
"You're going to have older people not wanting to put on their heat."
14 years of 'queueing for a pay rise'
On unions' calls for pay to be restored to 2010 levels, Ms Graham said: "Workers and communities have been back of the queue for over 14 years. They've been right at the back of the queue. They've had pay freezes.
"They haven't had pay rises in line with inflation. And the inflation is baked in. So while inflation is going up more slowly, those prices are still baked in.
"And what we're saying, as the union movement, is that workers need to be paid properly and that is something that we should be proud of.
"We should be proud to say that workers should be paid properly. And that's what I'm pushing for."
Up to 50 Labour MPs could rebel over cut to winter fuel allowance
Peter Walker Senior political correspondent
Sun 8 September 2024
The chancellor, Rachel Reeves, says the fuel payment cut is necessary to plug a £22bn hole in the public finances.Photograph: UK Parliament/Jessica Taylor/Reuters
As many as 50 Labour MPs could refuse to back the government’s controversial plan to cut the winter fuel allowance, despite Keir Starmer urging back benchers to get behind a measure he has conceded is “unpopular”.
While few on the government benches are expected to vote against the policy in Tuesday’s vote, dozens are believed to be considering abstaining or being absent – though rebels say the numbers in their ranks are very hard to predict.
After seven Labour MPs had the whip suspended in July for voting for an SNP amendment on the two-child benefit cap, the assumption is that a similar rebellion on Tuesday would bring the same consequences..
One Labour MP said: “I’d expect the vast majority of anyone who does rebel to abstain, and remain inside the tent. Abstention is the new rebellion. It’s a question of defining what dissent is, and it’s probably better to do this than to jump off a cliff.”
Although there is no chance of the vote being lost, a significant number of absences would indicate the extent of disquiet over a policy that many rebels fear could lose the party votes, and which one MP described as “a shitshow”.
Neither Starmer nor No 10 would comment on the potential punishment for rebels before the vote, which was triggered by the Conservatives formally opposing the plan to strip the payment from all but the poorest pensioners.
But in his first substantial TV interview since becoming prime minister, Starmer made it plain that he was unlikely to tolerate open dissent. When asked if he would apply the same police of removing the whip from rebels, Starmer told the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg: “That will be a matter for the chief whip.
“We’re going into a vote. I’m glad we’re having a vote, because I think it’s very important for parliament to speak on this. But every Labour MP was elected in on the same mandate as I was, which was to deliver the change that we need for the country.”
A number of Labour MPs, however, argue that the winter fuel decision is different, because of worries about the consequences for many older people and because it was not in the party’s manifesto.
Starmer reiterated the argument that the near-£1.5bn annual cost of no longer paying the allowance to all pensioners regardless of income was a vital element in plugging what the government says is a £22bn fiscal hole discovered after they took office.
He contrasted the decision with what he said was a Conservative government that had “run away from difficult decisions”.
“I’m absolutely convinced that we will only deliver that change – I’m absolutely determined we will – if we do the difficult things now,” he said. “I know they’re unpopular, I know they’re difficult. Of course, they’re tough choices. Tough decisions are tough decisions. Popular decisions aren’t tough, they’re easy.
“I do recognise how difficult it is for some people. I do recognise it’s really hard for some pensioners. But of course, they do rely on the NHS, they do rely on public transport. So these things aren’t completely divorced.”
He also argued that with the triple-lock policy of pension increases, he could guarantee that the annual increase in the state pension “will outstrip any reduction in the winter fuel payment”.
Wes Streeting, the health secretary, said the amount of criticism the policy had received showed the “political pain of it”.
He told Sky News: “I’m not remotely happy about it and I’m not remotely happy about having to say to some of my constituents: ‘I’m sorry that I’m going into work this week to vote for something that will take money away from you’. Let me tell you that whether it’s pensioners or anyone else in this country, they won’t forgive us if we duck the difficult decisions now and end up leaving the country with a bigger bill.”
Twelve Labour MPs have signed a Commons early day motion, a way to indicate opinion, expressing alarm at the plan, as have five of the backbenchers who had the whip suspended in July.
One of the latter group, John McDonnell, said on Sunday that he would rebel again unless ministers set out “a way of managing this that isn’t going to impact upon people in my constituency who are facing hardship”.
He told LBC radio: “But if that doesn’t happen by Tuesday, I will vote against. I can’t do anything else.”
With cabinet ministers known to be among those worried about the consequences of the policy, one backbencher said the implementation had been bungled.
“There was no equality impact assessment, no consultation with charities. And it was announced just before the summer recess. It’s hard to say how many people will abstain – a lot of the new MPs are quite scared of the whips – but everyone is being inundated with emails and letters about this,” they said.
There has been speculation that ministers could ease worries by announcing some sort of extra support. But No 10 officials say there is nothing planned beyond the existing extension of the household support fund, which allows councils to hand out some small grants, and encouraging eligible older people to apply for pension credit, which would entitle them to the winter fuel payment.
One MP said this would make little difference, saying the household support fund has only a marginal impact, while only about two-thirds of those who could claim pension credit did so, a proportion that seemed unlikely to notably shift.
“A lot of people won’t claim pension credit however much you advertise it,” they said. “The form you have to fill in is 24 pages long and has more than 200 questions. The whole way ministers have dealt with this is a shitshow.”
Rachel Reeves, the chancellor, has the tricky job of addressing MPs at a meeting of the parliamentary Labour party on Monday evening to push home the message about the need for fiscal sacrifices to encourage longer-term growth.
It remains to be seen if she will face any open dissent, with many backbenchers, especially those newly elected in July, known to be nervous about the possible repercussions of being seen as rebellious.
One backbencher who opposes the policy said, however, that they believed even Labour whips were often privately sympathetic.
“They’re getting the same volume of emails and letters that everyone is, or being stopped in the street by people who said they voted Labour and they now feel betrayed. It all feels politically illiterate, and the risk is it will push a lot of people away from us.”
Rachel Reeves’s winter fuel payment cut will put pensioners in hospital, Labour MPs fear
Andy Gregory
Sat 7 September 2024
THE INDEPENDENT
Labour frontbenchers and MPs have reportedly expressed fears that chancellor Rachel Reeves’s “brutal” plan to scrap the winter fuel allowance for all but the poorest pensioners will put more older people in hospital.
Around 10 million people are expected to be directly impacted by the plans announced by the chancellor in July – prompting gasps in the House of Commons – to cut the winter fuel payments first introduced by her predecessor Gordon Brown in 1997.
The decision, made ahead of Ms Reeves’s first budget next month, will axe the payment of up to £300 for all pensioners except those in receipt of those claiming pension credit or other means-tested benefits. It comes as regulator Ofgem raises its energy price cap by 10 per cent.
The decision comes as regulator Ofgem raises its energy price cap by 10 per cent (POOL/AFP via Getty)
The plans have sparked anger and concern across the country – close to half a million people have signed an Age UK petition calling on Sir Keir Starmer’s government to rethink its plans.
With MPs set to vote on the policy on Tuesday, Labour politicians have expressed their own grave concerns amid a flood of worried emails from constituents reported by The Independent to have shocked new MPs in particular.
In remarks to The Guardian, anonymous Labour MPs lined up to relay the sheer volume of the correspondence they have received on the issue, with one saying: “I don’t think there is a Labour MP who isn’t worried ... I’ve had more people stopping me in the street than over Brexit. Pensioners just pleading that we don’t do this.”
One cabinet source complained to the paper that the policy “hasn’t even been thought through properly”, warning: “We’re going to end up with more old people in hospital or care as a result, with all the costs involved in that.”
Another MP said: “It’s going to save us £1.5bn but that won’t be worth the political hit we’ll take this winter. The right-wing press will be full of stories about elderly people sitting in A&E or on buses because they can’t afford their fuel bills and it’s the only way they can keep warm.”
Ofgem has announced a 10 per cent rise in the energy price cap (Peter Byrne/PA)
Becoming the latest Labour MP to speak out on the record, Rosie Duffield told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme on Saturday: “I think all MPs have been inundated with emails. It’s not just those constituents affected – it’s also their families and people who are really concerned.”
Ms Duffield added: “I’ve had letters – I think we all have – from people who are suffering ongoing illness like cancer, and their doctors are telling them how important it is to keep warm.
“Human life is our job to protect and we know that these people are going to feel cold and it’s going to affect their health. That’s my biggest worry – that we’re going to see people dying ... it just feels particularly brutal.”
According to the End Fuel Poverty Coalition, some 4,950 excess deaths the winter before last were caused by living in cold homes.
Referencing the seven MPs who had the Labour whip removed after voting to scrap the two-child benefit cap in July, Ms Duffield said: “We’ve seen what happens when people vote against the government, which is a shame considering we have such a huge mandate.
“But I won’t be voting for this cut,” the Labour MP added. “Those of us who feel perhaps a bit more comfortable abstaining and know a bit more about being parliament are going to abstain to make the point that we’re there for our constituents more than we are for our party, I’m afraid.”
Twelve Labour MPs have now signed the early day motion set to be voted on next week calling on the government to postpone the cut.
The Treasury has been approached for comment.
How Red Wall pensioners surviving on £22k are bracing for Labour’s winter fuel raid
Noah Eastwood
Sky News
Sun 8 September 2024
Firebrand union leader Sharon Graham has told Sky News that Chancellor Rachel Reeves is guilty of "picking the pockets of pensioners" by cutting winter fuel payments.
The leader of the Unite union was speaking on the opening day of the TUC conference in Brighton, where she spearheaded demands for a wealth tax on millionaires to fund restoring the winter cash for pensioners.
"Britain is in crisis, and we need to make very, very different choices," said Ms Graham.
"We're calling on Labour not to pick the pockets of pensioners, but to have a wealth tax on the biggest and richest 1% in society."
She said her proposal would create £25 billion, more than enough to fill the £22 billion "black hole" blamed by the chancellor and Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer for the cuts.
"Job's done, let's move on and change society," she added.
"We're calling for the government to think again. This issue isn't going to go away. We're coming up to winter. People are going to be freezing cold.
"You're going to have older people not wanting to put on their heat."
14 years of 'queueing for a pay rise'
On unions' calls for pay to be restored to 2010 levels, Ms Graham said: "Workers and communities have been back of the queue for over 14 years. They've been right at the back of the queue. They've had pay freezes.
"They haven't had pay rises in line with inflation. And the inflation is baked in. So while inflation is going up more slowly, those prices are still baked in.
"And what we're saying, as the union movement, is that workers need to be paid properly and that is something that we should be proud of.
"We should be proud to say that workers should be paid properly. And that's what I'm pushing for."
Up to 50 Labour MPs could rebel over cut to winter fuel allowance
Peter Walker Senior political correspondent
Sun 8 September 2024
The chancellor, Rachel Reeves, says the fuel payment cut is necessary to plug a £22bn hole in the public finances.Photograph: UK Parliament/Jessica Taylor/Reuters
As many as 50 Labour MPs could refuse to back the government’s controversial plan to cut the winter fuel allowance, despite Keir Starmer urging back benchers to get behind a measure he has conceded is “unpopular”.
While few on the government benches are expected to vote against the policy in Tuesday’s vote, dozens are believed to be considering abstaining or being absent – though rebels say the numbers in their ranks are very hard to predict.
After seven Labour MPs had the whip suspended in July for voting for an SNP amendment on the two-child benefit cap, the assumption is that a similar rebellion on Tuesday would bring the same consequences..
One Labour MP said: “I’d expect the vast majority of anyone who does rebel to abstain, and remain inside the tent. Abstention is the new rebellion. It’s a question of defining what dissent is, and it’s probably better to do this than to jump off a cliff.”
Although there is no chance of the vote being lost, a significant number of absences would indicate the extent of disquiet over a policy that many rebels fear could lose the party votes, and which one MP described as “a shitshow”.
Neither Starmer nor No 10 would comment on the potential punishment for rebels before the vote, which was triggered by the Conservatives formally opposing the plan to strip the payment from all but the poorest pensioners.
But in his first substantial TV interview since becoming prime minister, Starmer made it plain that he was unlikely to tolerate open dissent. When asked if he would apply the same police of removing the whip from rebels, Starmer told the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg: “That will be a matter for the chief whip.
“We’re going into a vote. I’m glad we’re having a vote, because I think it’s very important for parliament to speak on this. But every Labour MP was elected in on the same mandate as I was, which was to deliver the change that we need for the country.”
A number of Labour MPs, however, argue that the winter fuel decision is different, because of worries about the consequences for many older people and because it was not in the party’s manifesto.
Starmer reiterated the argument that the near-£1.5bn annual cost of no longer paying the allowance to all pensioners regardless of income was a vital element in plugging what the government says is a £22bn fiscal hole discovered after they took office.
He contrasted the decision with what he said was a Conservative government that had “run away from difficult decisions”.
“I’m absolutely convinced that we will only deliver that change – I’m absolutely determined we will – if we do the difficult things now,” he said. “I know they’re unpopular, I know they’re difficult. Of course, they’re tough choices. Tough decisions are tough decisions. Popular decisions aren’t tough, they’re easy.
“I do recognise how difficult it is for some people. I do recognise it’s really hard for some pensioners. But of course, they do rely on the NHS, they do rely on public transport. So these things aren’t completely divorced.”
He also argued that with the triple-lock policy of pension increases, he could guarantee that the annual increase in the state pension “will outstrip any reduction in the winter fuel payment”.
Wes Streeting, the health secretary, said the amount of criticism the policy had received showed the “political pain of it”.
He told Sky News: “I’m not remotely happy about it and I’m not remotely happy about having to say to some of my constituents: ‘I’m sorry that I’m going into work this week to vote for something that will take money away from you’. Let me tell you that whether it’s pensioners or anyone else in this country, they won’t forgive us if we duck the difficult decisions now and end up leaving the country with a bigger bill.”
Twelve Labour MPs have signed a Commons early day motion, a way to indicate opinion, expressing alarm at the plan, as have five of the backbenchers who had the whip suspended in July.
One of the latter group, John McDonnell, said on Sunday that he would rebel again unless ministers set out “a way of managing this that isn’t going to impact upon people in my constituency who are facing hardship”.
He told LBC radio: “But if that doesn’t happen by Tuesday, I will vote against. I can’t do anything else.”
With cabinet ministers known to be among those worried about the consequences of the policy, one backbencher said the implementation had been bungled.
“There was no equality impact assessment, no consultation with charities. And it was announced just before the summer recess. It’s hard to say how many people will abstain – a lot of the new MPs are quite scared of the whips – but everyone is being inundated with emails and letters about this,” they said.
There has been speculation that ministers could ease worries by announcing some sort of extra support. But No 10 officials say there is nothing planned beyond the existing extension of the household support fund, which allows councils to hand out some small grants, and encouraging eligible older people to apply for pension credit, which would entitle them to the winter fuel payment.
One MP said this would make little difference, saying the household support fund has only a marginal impact, while only about two-thirds of those who could claim pension credit did so, a proportion that seemed unlikely to notably shift.
“A lot of people won’t claim pension credit however much you advertise it,” they said. “The form you have to fill in is 24 pages long and has more than 200 questions. The whole way ministers have dealt with this is a shitshow.”
Rachel Reeves, the chancellor, has the tricky job of addressing MPs at a meeting of the parliamentary Labour party on Monday evening to push home the message about the need for fiscal sacrifices to encourage longer-term growth.
It remains to be seen if she will face any open dissent, with many backbenchers, especially those newly elected in July, known to be nervous about the possible repercussions of being seen as rebellious.
One backbencher who opposes the policy said, however, that they believed even Labour whips were often privately sympathetic.
“They’re getting the same volume of emails and letters that everyone is, or being stopped in the street by people who said they voted Labour and they now feel betrayed. It all feels politically illiterate, and the risk is it will push a lot of people away from us.”
Rachel Reeves’s winter fuel payment cut will put pensioners in hospital, Labour MPs fear
Andy Gregory
Sat 7 September 2024
THE INDEPENDENT
Labour frontbenchers and MPs have reportedly expressed fears that chancellor Rachel Reeves’s “brutal” plan to scrap the winter fuel allowance for all but the poorest pensioners will put more older people in hospital.
Around 10 million people are expected to be directly impacted by the plans announced by the chancellor in July – prompting gasps in the House of Commons – to cut the winter fuel payments first introduced by her predecessor Gordon Brown in 1997.
The decision, made ahead of Ms Reeves’s first budget next month, will axe the payment of up to £300 for all pensioners except those in receipt of those claiming pension credit or other means-tested benefits. It comes as regulator Ofgem raises its energy price cap by 10 per cent.
The decision comes as regulator Ofgem raises its energy price cap by 10 per cent (POOL/AFP via Getty)
The plans have sparked anger and concern across the country – close to half a million people have signed an Age UK petition calling on Sir Keir Starmer’s government to rethink its plans.
With MPs set to vote on the policy on Tuesday, Labour politicians have expressed their own grave concerns amid a flood of worried emails from constituents reported by The Independent to have shocked new MPs in particular.
In remarks to The Guardian, anonymous Labour MPs lined up to relay the sheer volume of the correspondence they have received on the issue, with one saying: “I don’t think there is a Labour MP who isn’t worried ... I’ve had more people stopping me in the street than over Brexit. Pensioners just pleading that we don’t do this.”
One cabinet source complained to the paper that the policy “hasn’t even been thought through properly”, warning: “We’re going to end up with more old people in hospital or care as a result, with all the costs involved in that.”
Another MP said: “It’s going to save us £1.5bn but that won’t be worth the political hit we’ll take this winter. The right-wing press will be full of stories about elderly people sitting in A&E or on buses because they can’t afford their fuel bills and it’s the only way they can keep warm.”
Ofgem has announced a 10 per cent rise in the energy price cap (Peter Byrne/PA)
Becoming the latest Labour MP to speak out on the record, Rosie Duffield told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme on Saturday: “I think all MPs have been inundated with emails. It’s not just those constituents affected – it’s also their families and people who are really concerned.”
Ms Duffield added: “I’ve had letters – I think we all have – from people who are suffering ongoing illness like cancer, and their doctors are telling them how important it is to keep warm.
“Human life is our job to protect and we know that these people are going to feel cold and it’s going to affect their health. That’s my biggest worry – that we’re going to see people dying ... it just feels particularly brutal.”
According to the End Fuel Poverty Coalition, some 4,950 excess deaths the winter before last were caused by living in cold homes.
Referencing the seven MPs who had the Labour whip removed after voting to scrap the two-child benefit cap in July, Ms Duffield said: “We’ve seen what happens when people vote against the government, which is a shame considering we have such a huge mandate.
“But I won’t be voting for this cut,” the Labour MP added. “Those of us who feel perhaps a bit more comfortable abstaining and know a bit more about being parliament are going to abstain to make the point that we’re there for our constituents more than we are for our party, I’m afraid.”
Twelve Labour MPs have now signed the early day motion set to be voted on next week calling on the government to postpone the cut.
The Treasury has been approached for comment.
How Red Wall pensioners surviving on £22k are bracing for Labour’s winter fuel raid
Noah Eastwood
THE TELEGRAPH
Sat 7 September 2024
Winter Fuel Raid North
Rachel Reeves’s winter fuel raid will hit poorer pensioners in Red Wall constituencies hardest, Telegraph Money analysis has revealed.
Thousands of low-income retirees in Labour heartlands face losing £300 payments for energy this winter after the Chancellor decided to mean-test the benefit.
It comes as the Government, which is facing a growing backlash over the move, was accused of taking a “sledgehammer” approach to the winter fuel raid after research suggested most pensioners living in poverty will lose out.
Northern constituencies that helped hand Keir Starmer the keys to No 10 are among those where the loss of winter fuel payments is likely to cut deepest.
All but one of these seven Red Wall seats, which have the highest proportions of pensioners and low income households in the country, were won by Labour from the Conservatives in July.
They are Bishop Auckland, Blackpool North and Fleetwood, Rother Valley, Scarborough and Whitby, North Durham, and Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland. Only Redcar was held by the party at the last election.
Incomes after housing costs across the constituencies are as low as £22,000 a year on average, while the proportion of the population that are pensioners is as high as 26pc.
The revelation will increase pressure on Ms Reeves who is facing calls from a growing number of backbench Labour MPs to reconsider the plan.
Sam Rushworth, Labour MP for Bishop Auckland, a constituency in the Red Wall where low-income pensioners are most at risk, voiced his concern during Prime Minister’s Questions this week.
He asked: “They’re not entitled to pension credit. They live in cold, stone-built houses. What assurance can the Chancellor give to those pensioners that this government will help to warm their homes and ensure that they do not struggle to heat their homes this winter?”
A motion tabled by Neil Duncan-Jordan, Labour MP for Poole, said the decision to remove the winter fuel allowance from 10 million pensioners had come without “sufficient time to put in place a proper and effective take-up campaign for pension credit”.
Under the Government’s plans, only pensioners in receipt of pension credit will remain eligible for winter fuel payments. There are estimated to be 880,000 pensioners eligible for the support who are yet to claim.
The Treasury conducted no impact assessment on how the policy would affect the nation’s pensioners, The Telegraph reported last month.
Ms Reeves has justified the policy as necessary to help fill a £22bn “black hole” in the nation’s finances it is claimed was left by the Conservatives.
However, Baroness Ros Altmann, a former pensions minister, said the Labour policy was “wrong socially, economically, morally and indeed politically too”.
She said: “This has nothing really to do with politics, but politically it is just as misguided. The damage done to the pensioners living in the worst conditions and coldest parts of the UK this winter is not justifiable on any grounds.”
Telegraph analysis of Office for National Statistics (ONS) figures shows Bishop Auckland had an average household income of just £24,667 in the financial year ending 2020 after household expenditure, and 24pc of the population were pensioners at the time of the latest census.
The constituency also includes the village of Copley, which is the snowiest place in Britain.
Thirteen constituencies in total were analysed as being among the top quartile for share of pensioners and bottom quartile for average household income of every parliamentary seat in the UK.
Pensioners in three seats won by Reform UK – Clacton, Great Yarmouth, Torbay and Boston and Skegness – are also likely to have relatively little household income to afford the loss of winter fuel payments.
Those in three Conservative seats, including Bridlington and the Wolds, Louth and Horncastle and South Holland and the Deepings, could also struggle to afford energy bills without winter fuel payments, which range from £200 to £300.
MPs will debate the scrapping of winter fuel payments in a session in the House of Commons on Tuesday, when further concerns over the policy are expected to be raised.
Simon Francis, of the End Fuel Poverty Coalition, a charity network, said: “A lot of these names will be familiar to politicians for having very high levels of fuel poverty already because of the quality of their housing. The people who are going to suffer the most are indeed the poorest pensioners in the country.”
“What we have to see is support for households to stay warm each winter until our energy bills come down. This cut has come at the last minute and has not given households any time to prepare.”
Richard Tice, Reform UK deputy leader and MP for Boston and Skegness, said: “My inbox is full of desperately concerned pensioners who fear they will be colder and poorer this winter.
“They are furious about this while the government is paying billions to evermore asylum seekers and sending billions overseas in climate aid.”
The Government declined to comment.
Click here to view this content.
Sat 7 September 2024
Winter Fuel Raid North
Rachel Reeves’s winter fuel raid will hit poorer pensioners in Red Wall constituencies hardest, Telegraph Money analysis has revealed.
Thousands of low-income retirees in Labour heartlands face losing £300 payments for energy this winter after the Chancellor decided to mean-test the benefit.
It comes as the Government, which is facing a growing backlash over the move, was accused of taking a “sledgehammer” approach to the winter fuel raid after research suggested most pensioners living in poverty will lose out.
Northern constituencies that helped hand Keir Starmer the keys to No 10 are among those where the loss of winter fuel payments is likely to cut deepest.
All but one of these seven Red Wall seats, which have the highest proportions of pensioners and low income households in the country, were won by Labour from the Conservatives in July.
They are Bishop Auckland, Blackpool North and Fleetwood, Rother Valley, Scarborough and Whitby, North Durham, and Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland. Only Redcar was held by the party at the last election.
Incomes after housing costs across the constituencies are as low as £22,000 a year on average, while the proportion of the population that are pensioners is as high as 26pc.
The revelation will increase pressure on Ms Reeves who is facing calls from a growing number of backbench Labour MPs to reconsider the plan.
Sam Rushworth, Labour MP for Bishop Auckland, a constituency in the Red Wall where low-income pensioners are most at risk, voiced his concern during Prime Minister’s Questions this week.
He asked: “They’re not entitled to pension credit. They live in cold, stone-built houses. What assurance can the Chancellor give to those pensioners that this government will help to warm their homes and ensure that they do not struggle to heat their homes this winter?”
A motion tabled by Neil Duncan-Jordan, Labour MP for Poole, said the decision to remove the winter fuel allowance from 10 million pensioners had come without “sufficient time to put in place a proper and effective take-up campaign for pension credit”.
Under the Government’s plans, only pensioners in receipt of pension credit will remain eligible for winter fuel payments. There are estimated to be 880,000 pensioners eligible for the support who are yet to claim.
The Treasury conducted no impact assessment on how the policy would affect the nation’s pensioners, The Telegraph reported last month.
Ms Reeves has justified the policy as necessary to help fill a £22bn “black hole” in the nation’s finances it is claimed was left by the Conservatives.
However, Baroness Ros Altmann, a former pensions minister, said the Labour policy was “wrong socially, economically, morally and indeed politically too”.
She said: “This has nothing really to do with politics, but politically it is just as misguided. The damage done to the pensioners living in the worst conditions and coldest parts of the UK this winter is not justifiable on any grounds.”
Telegraph analysis of Office for National Statistics (ONS) figures shows Bishop Auckland had an average household income of just £24,667 in the financial year ending 2020 after household expenditure, and 24pc of the population were pensioners at the time of the latest census.
The constituency also includes the village of Copley, which is the snowiest place in Britain.
Thirteen constituencies in total were analysed as being among the top quartile for share of pensioners and bottom quartile for average household income of every parliamentary seat in the UK.
Pensioners in three seats won by Reform UK – Clacton, Great Yarmouth, Torbay and Boston and Skegness – are also likely to have relatively little household income to afford the loss of winter fuel payments.
Those in three Conservative seats, including Bridlington and the Wolds, Louth and Horncastle and South Holland and the Deepings, could also struggle to afford energy bills without winter fuel payments, which range from £200 to £300.
MPs will debate the scrapping of winter fuel payments in a session in the House of Commons on Tuesday, when further concerns over the policy are expected to be raised.
Simon Francis, of the End Fuel Poverty Coalition, a charity network, said: “A lot of these names will be familiar to politicians for having very high levels of fuel poverty already because of the quality of their housing. The people who are going to suffer the most are indeed the poorest pensioners in the country.”
“What we have to see is support for households to stay warm each winter until our energy bills come down. This cut has come at the last minute and has not given households any time to prepare.”
Richard Tice, Reform UK deputy leader and MP for Boston and Skegness, said: “My inbox is full of desperately concerned pensioners who fear they will be colder and poorer this winter.
“They are furious about this while the government is paying billions to evermore asylum seekers and sending billions overseas in climate aid.”
The Government declined to comment.
Click here to view this content.
No comments:
Post a Comment