Winter Fuel Payment

Acknowledges the difficult decision to means-test winter fuel payments, ending future payments for most pensioners while protecting those in greatest need. Implies that previous Conservative governments are responsible for current economic and financial challenges.

Critiques the Government's handling of the debate, noting the absence of a relevant Minister to respond despite the Chancellor sitting on the Front Bench. Accuses the Government of wasting billions on projects like Great British Energy and giving pay rises to union members.

The legacy of the previous Government was irresponsible overspending and uncosted commitments, resulting in a £22 billion black hole in public finances. The current savings include an assumption of increased take-up of pension credit, which supports those in greatest need.

Asked the Minister to outline how cutting winter fuel payments will save money when it might cost more under proposed means-testing measures.

Asked for reassurance that travel concessions for pensioners would continue under a Labour Government.

Inquired about the number of pensioners who will lose winter fuel allowance compared to the average train driver’s pay rise given by the current Government.

Questioned whether balancing fiscal books on pensioners was moral, and asked Scottish Labour MPs how they should vote given their manifesto promise of no austerity.

Stated that 15,000 pensioners in her constituency will lose winter fuel payments and argued that these individuals are not wealthy but hanging on by their fingertips.

Asked for an undertaking from the Minister to look into issues related to take-up of benefits in remote areas.

Cited extremely low temperatures in his constituency as an example, asking why pensioners would lose winter fuel allowance during such harsh conditions.

Asked the Minister to reassure pensioners that there is no way the Government will remove the single person discount from council tax.

Argued that the only shameful legacy is the economic situation left by the previous government, and emphasised the need to fix the economy to support pensioners.

The Liberal Democrats have tabled an early-day motion calling on the Government to withdraw plans to cut winter fuel payments. They argue that many pensioners are worried about how they will afford their energy bills this winter and have been inundated with local people expressing disappointment at this decision. The Government should have done more to understand the consequences of restricting eligibility for the winter fuel payment, which would increase burdens on the NHS.

Asked if the House was quorate due to concerns over the number of Labour MPs present in what is considered a serious debate.

The Conservative Government's policies have led to a significant increase in food bank usage from 40,000 parcels per year when the previous Labour government left office to 3 million last year. The triple lock on state pension rises has been broken by the Conservatives and must be reinstated as part of economic stability efforts.

The Conservative government introduced the triple lock to address issues left by the previous Labour Government, improving pensioner incomes. The current Labour decision to take £300 away from pensioners is a betrayal.

The Labour party's policy to means-test the winter fuel allowance will affect numerous pensioners in Bracknell, many of whom will struggle to pay bills as a result. This is an ideological decision rather than one based on economic necessity.

The Labour Government's decision affects 13,000 pensioners in Bracknell by removing winter fuel payments. Many will struggle to pay bills due to this action.

The removal of the winter fuel allowance is an ideological decision that harms pensioners. There has been a lack of transparency and impact assessment regarding the changes, including costs to NHS and funding for the household support fund.

The decision to target winter fuel payments is based on moral principles ensuring that those who need it most receive support. The state pension rise by £900 and future rises will still benefit pensioners, while the means-testing aims to address fiscal challenges.

The speaker criticises the government's decision to means-test winter fuel allowance. He mentions that it has nothing to do with black hole in the economy caused by inflationary pay increases for unions but is rather a policy made in 2014 by the current Chancellor and endorsed by the Prime Minister.

The Liberal Democrat Member agrees with the principle of means-testing for winter fuel allowance but criticises the manner in which it is being implemented, pointing out that many pensioners who qualify for pension credit have not yet registered.

The Labour Member explains his decision to vote with the government despite initial reservations. He argues that the winter fuel allowance has not increased in real terms since its introduction, and highlights the Conservative party's efforts to improve pension credit take-up.

The speaker criticises the government for not producing an impact assessment of the policy which could lead to thousands of people dying. He argues that it is shameful how this decision was made without proper process, affecting many pensioners who are just over the pension credit limit.

Opposes the proposed changes to the winter fuel allowance, emphasising the need for direct face-to-face applications for pension credit and a reduction in processing time from nine weeks. Highlights the high levels of fuel poverty in Northern Ireland and expresses concern over the well-being of women who have been disadvantaged by pension policies.

Defends the difficult decisions made by the Labour party to address economic instability. Argues that ignoring problems will not fix them and criticises the Conservative government's handling of public finances, noting the front-loading of spending which left little for later in the year.

Critiques the Labour party's decision to means-test winter fuel payments, emphasising the immediate financial pressure on pensioners. Points out that only 2,138 in her constituency receive pension credit compared to an estimated 18,300 who will lose winter fuel payment, highlighting disparities and health impacts of reduced benefits.

Turner criticises the government's approach to public sector pay and pensioners, highlighting the impact of real wage cuts on public services. He mentions a 6,000-strong workforce in his constituency who have been affected by food banks and payday loans due to financial pressures. Turner also points out the vacancy rates in teaching and healthcare sectors as consequences of these policies. He discusses the issue of pension credit eligibility and criticises the government for suggesting it would reject pay review body recommendations but then accepting them under Margaret Thatcher's leadership. Additionally, he notes that Labour increased winter fuel allowance fivefold compared to a real-terms cut under the previous Conservative government.

Evans raises a point of order regarding how Members should address each other in the Chamber, suggesting it is more appropriate to refer to colleagues by their constituency or as 'Friend'.

Nokes addresses the point of order raised by Evans, confirming his correctness on how Members should address each other. She also advises Members to keep interventions shorter to allow more time for debate.

Timothy raises a point of order asking if it would be in order for Labour MPs to declare their interests when talking about issues such as public sector pay, given that over 200 received more than £2 million in donations from trade unions before the election.

Wood criticises the government's decision to remove winter fuel payments, describing it as cruel for pensioners with fixed incomes. He provides examples of constituents who have written about their concerns regarding heating their homes versus other essential expenses due to this loss of income. Wood argues that Labour ran away from difficult choices instead of being upfront during the election campaign.

The Opposition criticises the Government for their decision to cut winter fuel payments, which they argue will not actually save money as pensioners are unlikely to increase their uptake of pension credit. They also highlight that Labour opposes this policy and believes it is a disservice to millions of pensioners.

The Conservative Member highlights the concern over the 18,883 pensioners in her constituency who will lose winter fuel payments, including Rita who cares for her husband with multiple sclerosis. She argues that this policy is a disservice to those who rely on these payments.

The Conservative Member expresses concern over the withdrawal of winter fuel allowance by Labour, affecting millions of pensioners across England. He emphasises that 15,744 constituents in Epping Forest will lose their payments, which could lead to health issues such as respiratory disease and hypothermia. He praises his party for supporting older people during difficult times.

The Labour Member discusses the varying needs of pensioners in her constituency, noting that while some feel comfortable not claiming benefits, others struggle to claim necessary support due to societal stigma. She aims to create a fair means-tested benefit system that encourages those who need help to seek it.

About 20,000 pensioners in Castle Point are set to lose their winter fuel payment under this cruel and vindictive policy. Despite efforts to increase uptake of pension credit, only 2,076 receive it. Many constituents with low energy efficiency homes or dementia are extremely worried about heating costs.

Calls for a proper impact analysis on the decision to cut winter fuel allowance and emphasises the fear and concern it causes constituents.

Worries that some constituents will die this year due to the policy decision to cut winter fuel allowances.

Urges Labour Members not to vote for cutting winter fuel allowance. Challenges them on choices they have to make and how pensioners are living in fear due to the decision. Calls it a political choice rather than addressing debt issues.

Cites an example of Betty Webb, a 101-year-old widow and former codebreaker who is living in fear due to the decision. Expresses concern about single persons losing discounts on council tax.

Nearly 22,000 constituents will lose their winter fuel payments. Many residents are off-grid and rely on expensive oil or logs for heating, leading to high costs. Suggests alternative ways like the council tax rebate scheme as an option to avoid this cliff edge.

Agrees with Rebecca Smith's points and raises concern that there is no provision for those living with dementia or long-term frailty in the proposal.

Criticises the Labour Government for refusing to abolish the two-child benefit cap and cutting winter fuel payments. Mentions that 68% of households in Carmarthenshire live in homes with poor energy efficiency and many rely on oil, which can be very volatile.

The MP reflects on his experience delivering Meals on Wheels to disadvantaged people and criticises the Government's decision to cut winter fuel payments, arguing that it is overly harsh for less well-off pensioners. He calls for more competence in governance from the Government.

The MP argues against the description of pensioners as millionaires, pointing out that even if their homes are worth millions, they lack liquidity to sell them in case of emergencies. He criticises the SNP for not ameliorating the decision and calls it a wrong-headed one.

The MP highlights the unfair impact on pensioners due to the removal of winter fuel allowance, citing personal stories from her constituents. She criticises the lack of proper assessment before the decision and calls for spreading the burden among those with broader shoulders.

The MP argues that cutting winter fuel payments is a political choice, not necessity. He highlights broken promises by Labour regarding energy bills and inflation-busting pay rises to union members while pensioners face cuts. He challenges Labour MPs to explain their stance on poorer constituents facing the cut in four years' time.

The MP discusses his personal experience and urges the Government to reconsider its decision, highlighting the context of rising energy prices and broken promises. He has received numerous letters from constituents regarding the cut and strongly advises the Government to change course.

For over five years, I have been raising the issue of impact assessments and the fact that they do not make any sense. Impact assessments are done on a stupid basis that does not make any sense, and certainly not in today’s world. If the Opposition Front Benchers had only changed it when they had the opportunity, we would not be in this situation today. But the Labour party has the opportunity to change the way we do impact assessments so that they actually make sense. They should be about not just whether businesses will be impacted to the tune of £5 million, but what matters to people and whether their lives will be impacted by a change in policy. We do not have an impact assessment for this policy. Do the Labour party and the UK Government know that single women are three times more likely to be missing out on pension credit than single men? Does the Labour party know that pensioners who are black or from Asian ethnic backgrounds are more likely to be in poverty than white pensioners? How will this policy grow the economy? How will ensuring that pensioners, who we know spend in their local communities, have less money to spend in those local shops grow the economy?

I find it slightly ironic that we are debating this policy today. This is about political choice. A policy that was brought in under Gordon Brown—a social democratic policy of inclusivity under which everyone buys into the state—is being scrapped in favour of a neoliberal means-tested policy, one that I think most actual Labour socialists would be ashamed of. One of the issues for those elderly people is heating. These are the elderly who fought for the reconstruction of Britain in post-war London and across the UK, had rationing for years and paid their taxes. We have built this country on the back of their hard work and sacrifice, only to turn around and say, “No. We did not scrap this policy under 14 years of a Conservative Government, but we are scrapping it as the first thing we do as a Labour Government.” This is a political choice to give Labour’s union paymasters a pay rise over vulnerable pensioners.

After 14 years of the Labour party being out in the cold, the pensioners of this country backed Labour into government, under an impression created by the Prime Minister. Only in May 2024, he goaded our Government, asking whether the Prime Minister would rule out taking pensioners’ winter fuel payments off them. This was a choice—as Laura Kuenssberg pointed out, it was a choice to pay the unions on the back of our pensioners. The cartoonist Matt sums it up perfectly when he says, “Surprisingly, Robin Hood, nobody likes your plan to steal from pensioners to give to train drivers.” I am disappointed that Labour Members did not take that advice.

I rise to express my strong opposition to the Government’s decision to remove the winter fuel payment from millions of pensioners, a move that will strip vital financial support from thousands of my constituents—people who have contributed to our country and helped to build it. The impact in Bexhill and Battle will be profound: Age UK estimates that more than 25,000 pensioners will lose their winter fuel payment as a result of this decision. However, from 2010 onwards, through all these difficult times, we made decisions to protect pensioners, and we made sure to keep the winter fuel payment. It was the right thing to do then, and it is the right thing to do now. I ask the Government to listen to MPs from across the House, including some on their own Benches, and think again.

The Prime Minister and Labour Members tried to bring this country together after division and turmoil, and today I have to say they have succeeded. They have united the country in opposition to this new Labour Government and their attack on older people—the very people who deserve compassion, dignity and respect after a lifetime of hard work. Our pensioners are being left out in the cold by a Government who promised to restore hope. What hope do pensioners have in Upper Bann? They now feel like they are the target. To be fair, this Government have offered pensioners something to keep them busy through the cold winter months by suggesting they take a stab at completing the pension credit application form—a form with 243 questions across 24 pages, with a delay of nine weeks for a decision.

Critiques Labour's decision to scrap the winter fuel allowance, highlighting the higher risk of poverty for rural pensioners. He emphasises that Conservative Government upgraded pensions and protected the triple lock, lifting 200,000 people out of poverty.

Expresses strong opposition to Labour's decision to scrap winter fuel allowance for pensioners, stating it will negatively impact over 64,000 pensioners in the Bradford district. He criticises the Government's choice to put vulnerable pensioners at risk and forces them into impossible decisions between heating homes or putting food on the table.

Opposes the decision, arguing it is incompetent operationally, fiscally, and morally. He warns that people will die as a result of this decision due to cultural sensitivities that prevent older people from asking for help.

Speaks on behalf of pensioners in his constituency who are set to lose their winter fuel allowance. He criticises the Government's choice, highlighting that they are punishing conscientious choices made by people through their working lives.

Claims every Labour MP who voted for the cut broke a promise to the country and highlights that in 2014, the Chancellor planned to cut winter fuel allowance. He criticises the decision's lack of case and the redistribution of proceeds.

Relates a personal encounter with a pensioner who was upset by the proposed cuts, emphasising fears about energy prices and survival through winter. He criticises the Government's decision to enrich public sector workers while impoverishing pensioners.

Some 17,047 pensioners in Gordon and Buchan will lose their winter fuel payment following today’s vote by the Labour party. The decision means that pensioners now have to make difficult choices about how to afford heating their homes this winter. This is especially troubling given north-east Scotland's harsh winters where temperatures often fall below minus 10°C for sustained periods.

The new Labour Government, Prime Minister, and Chancellor have made a poor political choice by cutting winter fuel payments. This measure is not supported by charities or groups due to its delivery method and timescales. Despite the Government's claims of necessity, unemployment stands at 4.1%, sterling is up against the dollar, and growth outpaces inflation. Pensioners will face higher winter fuel bills with no immediate notice, leading to an increased demand for pension credit.

I represent Northern Ireland where 49.5% of homes rely solely on oil for heat. The Government’s decision will put additional pressures on Northern Ireland pensioners, as announced by our Minister for Communities today that over 306,000 people will lose the winter fuel payment.

Reynolds spoke about the importance of means-testing winter fuel payments, citing support from Members including Sir Roger Gale. She also discussed efforts to increase pension credit uptake, mentioning that up to an estimated 880,000 eligible pensioners are missing out on this benefit worth £3,900 annually. Reynolds highlighted actions taken by the Government to raise awareness and encourage claims for pension credit.

Gale intervened to clarify that while he supports the principle of means-testing winter fuel payments, he opposes the manner in which the Labour Government intends to implement it.

Jardine thanked Reynolds for giving way and expressed concern over the method of implementing means-testing winter fuel payments, criticising the lack of flexibility around the pension credit limit.