The Labour Party under Keir Starmer

[Merle Haggard]

I'm not sure the personal tax allowance was designed at all.

The original intention was as I stated - in effect only people with earnings above the level for an acceptable standard of living were taxed.

I can't find any statistics but I have a clear recollection in the 1950s (when working for a living was far in the future for me!) that income tax - even then - was still a trivial amount for ordinary working people, and the subsequent increases produced a great deal of complaint.

As it happens if state pension is at a level to provide a 'basic' standard of living then the personal allowance still has the effect.

Of course the Winter Fuel Payment & Bus Pass are not issued automatically, they need to be applied for. So if you don’t need them, or don’t want them, then don’t apply for them.

The Bus Pass only has a cost to the state when you use it (apart from the small cost of the pass itself).
You might argue that the Bus Pass is a subsidy to operators not pensioners (and other groups that use it). If demand is influenced by price, people use a free Bus Pass when they might choose an alternative if they had to pay. The bus company therefore has the benefit of demand generated by zero price but the income from the money (in effect fare) they receive for each such journey.

 

[Harpo]

On school absence, the education industry is a service industry that fails to treat parents as customers and instead treats them as suppliers to be dictated to in much the way that supermarkets treat their suppliers.

School holiday calendars surely don’t need to be absolutely identical across the country? A better spread of spring and summer holiday dates would help the travel industry smooth demand and possibly smooth peak pricing. It would also help employers spread the summer leave demands.

 

[Gloster]

The purpose of schools is to educate children so that they will have more opportunities in life and, say it quietly, to better help the country to prosper. They, if anyone, are the customers, but as they are as yet uneducated somebody else has to decide for them. It is better to have someone dispassionate making the decisions than someone, like a parent, who has all sorts of vested interests. Yes, some, maybe the majority, get it generally right, but should we leave it to a survival of the luckiest and abandon all those whose parents don’t care or are too selfish.

And the private school system is as bad, if not worse. There the parents are actually paying and if a parent wants something, they get it. (Written by someone who was good at arts subjects and lousy at science, but was pushed through the science stream until I bombed at A-Level because that was what my parents wanted.)

I am afraid the interests of the children must come first and if that prevents parents from taking them on cheap holidays, so be it. I am with Sir Humphrey on this.

 

[Tester]

Of course the Winter Fuel Payment & Bus Pass are not issued automatically, they need to be applied for. So if you don’t need them, or don’t want them, then don’t apply for them.

The winter fuel payment is automatic.

 

[brad465]

The comms surrounding this winter fuel payment policy have been really shoddy, which has contributed to much of the backlash. While many will agree a universal payment that even goes to the richest in the country is flawed, the way it's been handled has left many thinking they will lose the payment even if they won't. There will also be recipients who are eligible for pension credits but don't claim them who will be impacted; there needs to be a campaign to help those to apply in this instance.

Another problem Labour will potentially have is this winter, is that I wouldn't be surprised if certain media outlets opposed to them go on a "treasure hunt" to find a pensioner who's died in a way that could be put down to unaffordable heating. Even if said individual is at or above life expectancy and/or had other ailments contributing to their death, it could easily be spun into a government attack and perception matters a lot in politics. For this reason I think Labour shouldn't have rushed in with the policy and waited till March - get this winter out of the way, then give most of those affected another 6-9 months time to prepare for the following winter.

 

[dangie]

The winter fuel payment is automatic.

If I remember correctly, the Winter Fuel Payment is issued automatically once you’ve registered for it. When I became eligible I was sent a letter to apply for it. After that it is automatic. If you didn’t register you didn’t get it. I believe you can opt out at any time if you so wish.

This was quite a few years ago so apologies if the rules have changed.

 

[JamesT]

I'm not sure the personal tax allowance was designed at all. It was substantially increased to an arbitrary (but no unreasonable) level in the coalition years, but inflation has been allowed to completely ravage it since then.

We're still somewhat ahead of 2010 with the personal allowance. It was £6,475 then, which if it had just increased by inflation would be £9,690. Whereas it's actually £12,570.
But fiscal drag is a very easy tool for a Chancellor to get more money without doing something that looks too obviously like they're raising taxes.

Personally I'd have thought that completely eliminating the winter allowance and increasing the pension credit by 300 quid would be a more equitable thing to do, achieving something for a similar range of people, but removing silly cliff edges.

The problem with any alternatives is that the money is needed this year if we are to start digging ourselves out of the hole we are in. It's felt to be possible to implement the currently-proposed solution this year, because it has been lovingly prepared for years by what you might call treasury mandarins who have been waiting for a chancellor with a backbone. Other solutions simply won't be ready for the budget.

Honestly I suspect by the time the budget is through that this will be the least of most peoples concerns

Labour have painted themselves into a corner by promising not to raise various taxes and not to increase borrowing, so things like this is what they're stuck with.

 

[Tester]

If I remember correctly, the Winter Fuel Payment is issued automatically once you’ve registered for it. When I became eligible I was sent a letter to apply for it. After that it is automatic. If you didn’t register you didn’t get it. I believe you can opt out at any time if you so wish.

This was quite a few years ago so apologies if the rules have changed.

No apologies necessary, but I have received it without ever registering.

 

[edwin_m]

The Winter Fuel Payment is highly topical at present, but why can't it be means tested? Those on state pension only (ie no work pension) should get the full payment, those with small works pensions should get most of it, those on slightly bigger works pensions should get a small payment, while that quarter of all pensioners who are millionaires (yes really!) should get none of this payment. Yet for some reason I can't fathom, when it comes to the winter fuel payment, this Government is treating millionaires exactly the same as those who have almost no pension whatsoever, and who really are struggling to pay their bills.

This isn't exactly rocket science, yet none of the interviewers interrogating countless politician about it on TV and radio, ever seem to mention it. Does anyone know why this payment can't be means tested?

The proposal does effectively means test it by linking it to another payment that's already means tested. Although there's a question about whether that's the appropriate level to cut it off.

However, another argument could be that those who have had a well paid job throughout their working career and thus now have a good pension, they have always and still do pay a fair bit of their incoming's in Income Tax. So why shouldn’t they now receive something back?

If they've paid a lot into pension then that was treated as tax-free income at the time, which I assume is why pensions are taxable subject to the relevant allowances (although pensioners don't pay National Insurance). The winter fuel allowance was introduced in 1997 I believe, so many of today's pensioners wouldn't have expected to receive it until relatively late in their working careers. Pensions have also gone up in real terms since then, thanks to the triple lock.

School holiday calendars surely don’t need to be absolutely identical across the country? A better spread of spring and summer holiday dates would help the travel industry smooth demand and possibly smooth peak pricing. It would also help employers spread the summer leave demands.

There's some merit in this - I guess the Scots benefit from having their summer holidays start (and finish) well before those in England, and where I grew up the system of Wakes Weeks was still in existence, where all the factories and schools in a particular town shut down for two weeks, and in earlier years this was no doubt accompanied by numerous trains to and from Blackpool.

But it may be difficult to realise in practice. If done across a large region there isn't so much benefit because all flights from that region will be busier during the holiday period, and if done in smaller regions there's more risk that families with some children in schools across the boundary will end up only being able to take holidays during the overlap period. It's probably more about flights than the holidays themselves, as accommodation peaks in overseas resorts will be smoothed out by taking visitors from multiple countries with their own different holiday dates.

 

[Gloster]

Do it like they do in France. (What, do things the French way! Never, sir, never, will we bow to the frogs!). The country is derived into three zones with roughly equal population totals and the dates for the three zones are echeloned. (Corsica is separate.) It is not perfect and people will no doubt complain that they can’t holiday with family or friends from another area, but it is simple to understand.

 

[davews]

I certainly don't need the winter fuel allowance but it is welcome when it arrives - and I don't remember having to register, it just appeared. I am also not affected by the latest fuel increase being on a fixed price contract till next March. However I agree it has been badly handled and linking it to pension credit is a bad choice. I checked this morning, your income has to be less than £11343 to qualify. It would have been far fairer to set the threshold for winter fuel allowance to average earnings?

As for the bus pass, I mainly use this in London where it is a convenience and where a bus can be used in conjunction with other things to save buying a travel card. I occasionally use it on local buses but that is rare, and as said above if you don't use the bus pass it costs nobody anything.

 

[takno]

The comms surrounding this winter fuel payment policy have been really shoddy, which has contributed to much of the backlash. While many will agree a universal payment that even goes to the richest in the country is flawed, the way it's been handled has left many thinking they will lose the payment even if they won't. There will also be recipients who are eligible for pension credits but don't claim them who will be impacted; there needs to be a campaign to help those to apply in this instance.

There has been plenty of publicity for the policy, much of which has been specifically intended to get pensioners to check if they qualify for pension credits. I can't find a reference now, but I read somewhere that applications for pension credits last month were double what they normally are.

 

[Shrop]

I certainly don't need the winter fuel allowance but it is welcome when it arrives - and I don't remember having to register, it just appeared. I am also not affected by the latest fuel increase being on a fixed price contract till next March. However I agree it has been badly handled and linking it to pension credit is a bad choice. I checked this morning, your income has to be less than £11343 to qualify. It would have been far fairer to set the threshold for winter fuel allowance to average earnings?

So if your income is £11,500 you get treated EXACTLY the same as you do if you have a pension of £50,000 in addition to your state pension. I thought this Government was keen to be fair to those on low incomes, and yet those in low incomes are being penalised because Govt seems incapable of working out a fairer system. My pension isn't very big but I could survive without the winter fuel payment, my concern is for those who are on a total income of £11,500 or just above. I still don't understand why they should be treated the same as the wealthy.

However, another argument could be that those who have had a well paid job throughout their working career and thus now have a good pension, they have always and still do pay a fair bit of their incoming's in Income Tax. So why shouldn’t they now receive something back? The same argument goes for the Concessionary Bus Pass. They’ve paid a lot in, now receive a little back.

Yes of course people could argue that they've paid money in and so they're entitled to receive some back. But when the direct result of this is that many of those who are less fortunate will suffer, while they're so comfortable that they wouldn't even notice the absence of such a payment, then this attitude isn't very charitable.

 

[Harpo]

The winter fuel allowance withdrawal has been very harshly handled. It could have been part of a package of measures to ease the pain.

Abolishing energy standing charges would have had a useful impact on all of the poorest by spreading that burden far more fairly.

Moving even a part of the WFA into the state pension would have made it taxable, instantly recovering 20% or 40% from more affluent pensioners who pay tax. It could even have been paid in lieu of next years triple lock increase.

Finally an age allowance lifting poorest pensioners clear of tax could also have helped.

The absence of anything additional at all to ease the pain of the poorest OAPs has made Labour look desperately uncaring in its first big call.

 

[takno]

Abolishing energy standing charges would have had a useful impact on all of the poorest by spreading that burden far more fairly.

They could spread that burden more fairly by just making the charges equal across the country. The logic to making them twice as high in Scotland as they are in London is tortuous beyond all reason.

 

[ChrisC]

I certainly don't need the winter fuel allowance but it is welcome when it arrives - and I don't remember having to register, it just appeared. I am also not affected by the latest fuel increase being on a fixed price contract till next March. However I agree it has been badly handled and linking it to pension credit is a bad choice. I checked this morning, your income has to be less than £11343 to qualify. It would have been far fairer to set the threshold for winter fuel allowance to average earnings?

As for the bus pass, I mainly use this in London where it is a convenience and where a bus can be used in conjunction with other things to save buying a travel card. I occasionally use it on local buses but that is rare, and as said above if you don't use the bus pass it costs nobody anything.

I got the winter fuel allowance for the first time last winter and it was automatic, I didn’t have to register. I also don’t need the winter fuel allowance but there are plenty who do. There‘s got to be a cut off point somewhere but the threshold for being eligible for Pension Credit is a bit low. It’s those on very small work pensions in addition to the state pension who will really miss it, those whose annual income is somewhere between the £11343 and perhaps around £15000.

My experience of living in a village where the majority of residents are fairly wealthy retired people is that they do not use their bus passes, that’s if they even bothered to apply for one. We are fortunate, for a village, in having an hourly bus service, but very few of these wealthy elderly people ever use it.

The whole subject of what retired people automatically receive is a complex and difficult one whether it be winter fuel payments, bus passes or even free prescriptions etc. Certainly very wealthy pensioners should perhaps not receive anything but again where do you draw the line. I’m certainly not a millionaire, but do have enough money to not really need these things. I am just comfortably well off, having worked hard all my life, getting a good teachers pension in addition to my state pension, and also having built up a reasonable amount of savings.

 

[brad465]

The opposition vote on blocking the cut has failed to pass, with 348 voting against vs 228 for. I suspect plenty of Labour MPs abstained, but if I've calculated correctly, the number of Labour rebels won't be more than a dozen, assuming almost all the opposition voted against and a few pairings exist for those that didn't.

Winter fuel vote live: Opposition MPs fail to block winter fuel payments cut

The Commons vote comes after PM Keir Starmer said that his government "won't be reckless" with money.

www.bbc.co.uk

Attempt to block winter fuel cut fails in Commons
​

An attempt by the Conservatives to block cuts to the winter fuel allowance has failed, after MPs voted down an opposition motion by 348 to 228.

We'll bring you a full breakdown of the result, including how many Labour MPs refused to support the government, as soon as we have the numbers.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

In my opinion an easy way in the short term would be payment to be based on no income tax paid.

Sounds reasonable to me.

My mother pays tax, so even though she is nearly 90 she does not deserve to get the winter fuel payment.

 

[Donny Dave]

Moving even a part of the WFA into the state pension would have made it taxable, instantly recovering 20% or 40% from more affluent pensioners who pay tax. It could even have been paid in lieu of next years triple lock increase.

It could, but then Labour would be breaking the promise to keep the triple lock, plus next year's increase is going to be around £460

State pension set to rise by £460 next year

The latest figure comes as the government faces a backlash over cutting winter fuel payments for most pensioners.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Shrop]

It could, but then Labour would be breaking the promise to keep the triple lock, plus next year's increase is going to be around £460

Politicians breaking a promise? Whatever next!

So those 3 million pensioners who are millionaires will get the £460 increase even though most of those won't even notice it and certainly don't need it. Meanwhile a great many people with hardly any savings and an income of £11,500, many of whom will also have worked all of their lives but in less well paid jobs, will only get the same amount, much of which they will have to use to offset their winter fuel bills. As I said earlier, of course the rich might well have paid their contributions, but you'd think there could be a fairer system.

 

[davews]

It could, but then Labour would be breaking the promise to keep the triple lock, plus next year's increase is going to be around £460

The actual figure is still hearsay. In any case it only applies to the new pension. Around 2/3 of pensioners including myself who were born before 1951 are on the old pension which is a lower amount. In fact because I was contracted out for 25 years or so I only get around £85/week so don't expect my rise next year will be anything like that. At least I have a good company pension on top of it.

 

[BrianW]

Labour are doing ok. Only one labour rebel in the vote on Winter Fuel Allowance- MPs have learned from the last 'rebellion'. There's still a Ming Vase 'out there'- the spectre of Liz Truss and 'the markets'. The Chancellor can, if wished, offer mitigations in the budget; or 'the leadership' can continue to bash 'the former government's massive black hole' , taking the hard decisions, the 'decisions we didn't want to make', while storing up opportunity to give something back between now and the next General Election. It would take loads of By-elections to lose the current stonking majority. They will be well aware of the popular measures that can be introduced (eg WFA; two child limit; etc) when the time is right/ in the fullness of times, when some faction needs to be 'bought off', when 'green shoots of growth' may also start to be seen ...

 

[Citybreak1]

What’s everybody’s thought on Labours first few weeks or months in office?

 

[Harpo]

What’s everybody’s thought on Labours first few weeks or months in office?

Good to have grown-ups back in charge again.

 

[Falcon1200]

What’s everybody’s thought on Labours first few weeks or months in office?

Utterly fed up with the unrelenting negativity from Starmer and Reeves, and the outright lie about inheriting the worst financial position since the Norman Conquest (or something like that).

 

[brad465]

Utterly fed up with the unrelenting negativity from Starmer and Reeves, and the outright lie about inheriting the worst financial position since the Norman Conquest (or something like that).

National Debt is around 100% of GDP, house prices are out of reach for many first time buyers compared to previous generations and the tax burden is at its highest in decades, to name a few examples of poor economic performance. You can question whether Labour right now have the right idea about addressing these issues, but they're not wrong to at least say they've inherited a bad situation.

 

[YorkRailFan]

What’s everybody’s thought on Labours first few weeks or months in office?

I didn't have High hopes for Starmer but he's shattered my expectations (not in a good way), he's not even done the bare minimum when it comes to reversing the mess left by the Tories. No idea how Starmer will win a second term.

 

[Sorcerer]

Utterly fed up with the unrelenting negativity from Starmer and Reeves

Same here even though I was never keen on Starmer's Labour in the first place, but I also try to remember that the alternative was another five years of the Conservatives, and the thought of that kind of disturbs me.

 

[Shrop]

What’s everybody’s thought on Labours first few weeks or months in office?

Not a great start. My interest is particularly in transport, to which end I would ask where is their interest in roads and railways? Are they doing much towards mitigating Sunaks' damage to HS2? Are they doing anything towards tackling that huge cause of road accidents, ie driving too close to the vehicle in front? After all the technology isn't hard these days, and Government keeps saying they're desperate for money, which they could raise through fines whilst simultaneously saving lives and creating employment. Oh, and there's always something to be said for repeat driving tests every 10 years, after all most other things which require qualifications are subject to regular re-testing, and drivers kill far more often than people in most other professions do. Any arguments with this?

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Not a great start. My interest is particularly in transport, to which end I would ask where is their interest in roads and railways? Are they doing much towards mitigating Sunaks' damage to HS2? Are they doing anything towards tackling that huge cause of road accidents, ie driving too close to the vehicle in front? After all the technology isn't hard these days, and Government keeps saying they're desperate for money, which they could raise through fines whilst simultaneously saving lives and creating employment. Oh, and there's always something to be said for repeat driving tests every 10 years, after all most other things which require qualifications are subject to regular re-testing, and drivers kill far more often than people in most other professions do. Any arguments with this?

Mine too. I know money is tight but surely an increase on fuel duty has to be on the cards.