[Politics] Labour Party meltdown incoming.......

[The Clamp]

A blunt instrument, he miscalculated politically. So far, on this.

Did he? Or perhaps he knows he has to make some very unpopular decisions.

 

[chip]

I think this has been terribly managed, poorly timed and the reasoning somewhat vacuous. We are very well aware how socio-economic factors affect wellbeing and health and that this group will contain a higher proportion of people with complex needs and comorbidities. They will have deletorious outcomes as many above have observed as a result of this. This thinking could also lead to PIP being means tested, there must be many wealthy disabled people who could afford their own mobility car. Removing universallity seems to be a great way of polarising one group against another. In this case we don't have any idea what the "savings" will be used for. Perhaps a more honest presentation of where the money goes and how they want to spend before f*cking over their voters might be a good idea. This doesn't dispose me to thinking we have an honest and open government with a clear adgenda which would be nice given the previous shower of shit. I'm genuinely surprised how many people are happy to defend this one, a real paucity of compassion in my view.

 

[Guinness Boy]

As @Guinness Boy said earlier, the money has to come from somewhere. We can’t keep rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic by moving piles of money around in the shrinking coffers of the public purse when what we need to do is fix the economy and the £140 billion shrinkage since Brexit..

What the Government really needs to do about fuel frankly, is to step in and stop OFGEM from yet again raising the cap allowing energy suppliers to raise the price of bills again. OFGEM is really not fit for purpose and has the interests of fuel companies at heart to the detriment of consumers.

It is fcuking disgraceful that last year, while most of us were shivering in our homes when fuel prices were going through the roof, Shell, Equinor, ExxonMobil and BP made £65bn in net profits which arguably stoked the energy bills crisis in the first place.

Rather than clutching our pearls over £200-300 per year being withdrawn for Pensioners who are on enough income to take them above means-tested benefits level (either through savings or full State Pension) we should be looking to reduce fuel bills for everyone and also subsidise the £2 billion winter fuel payments (currently paid to all pensioners) in their cost to the Government from the £10 billion windfall tax on the fat cat energy sector over the next 5 years. We should then be able to afford to widen the qualifying criteria for pension fuel payments (ie disabilities, housing occupancy, number of rooms, tax band regardless of income etc).

Windfall taxes should not be used to reinvest in green energy - that’s not a ‘tax’ - that’s greenwashing the insidious profits made by fuel companies and reinvesting them back into those very same companies under the auspices of Climate Change policies. The green sector is viable and self-sustaining enough now to be driven by private enterprise.

Make energy companies give back some of the excessive profits to the people they stole them from.

Absolutely all of this

 

[Paulie Gualtieri]

And if we're going to go down the Covid route the previous government's incompetence / helping out their mates saw 4 billion pounds worth of useless PPE in the UK. Source? The UK Parliament itself.

Labour aren't taking away this payment from ALL old people (despite the press reporting that is at best misleading) and I'd expect most pensioners in Whitehawk to qualify for Pension Credit. One of the things this has done is raise awareness that this should be being claimed where it wasn't, but people who are entitled to it weren't claiming. Those people will suddenly find themselves with extra money via the credit, another rise in their pension next year thanks to preserving triple lock and keeping their Winter Heating payments.

There are some on the cusp who will be worse off till the next triple lock kicks in. There are plenty with comfortable pensions in houses with hundreds of thousands of equity crying over 300 quid.

Ib addition how about the £17B written off for fraud and defaults from Cbills and bounce back loans, despite us, in industry lobbying the government for tighter eligibility and verification checks, which fell on deaf ears.

Pathetic shit show which we are all now saddled with paying as non of these clowns are accountable for their mistakes

 

[Weststander]

Did he? Or perhaps he knows he has to make some very unpopular decisions.

Unpopular that will hit some households on very modest income to say the least.

I'd wager that before the winter Reeves has done something to mitigate this.

 

[Baldseagull]

It's not. Some of the benefits which are being used as gateway qualifications to receiving the Winter Fuel Payment are means tested.

We won't find agreement on this though, so just answer me this one...

If the Tory party put in a change that led to a very well-regarded charity issuing a statement that up to 2m poor and vulnerable people could be adversely-impacted and launched a peitition to try and stop that policy change, are you seriously pretending you'd dismiss those concerns, and applaud the Tory party for making the change?

I would be happier if there were a clearer cut way of making sure those that needed it got it, but there will always be some that just miss out.
The charity does have another interest though, in that a large number of pensioners that felt that they didn't need the extra money, donated it to charity.
This has f***ed up their annual marketing campaign to beg OAP's for their winter fuel payment cash.

 

[BLOCK F]

Some poignant phone calls on this to LBC and R5 over the last few weeks. Elderly callers in the household income bracket just above pension credit, until now used to pay the WFP as soon as received, to their utilities supplier. To give themselves assurance over the winter months. Genuinely, that hit home for me.

That is the reality of the situation for many pensioners and comes as no surprise to those of us who have pointed out the utterly shambolic way that Labour have gone about this business.

 

[chip]

I almost guarantee I could go through any pensioners monthly budget and save £25 a month for the next four or five months when they’ll all get an extra £450 a year off the government.

How about I go through your accounts and find £100 that you can't spend anymore on the basis that you'll get a few more pounds some time in the future.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

Correct, it would be outrageous for a politician to claim that we should “let the bodies pile high in their thousands”, I’m sure you would agree?

I am not sure using Johnson as a bar is that useful, Labour are meant to be better than Johnsons lot, already seen a lot of "well, the Tories did xyz" doesn't matter, they have brought this policy in after demanding it not being removed previously.

So what are people seriously thinking here then?

That Kier Starmer, clearly an intelligent and insight man, has deliberately decided to piss off a huge swathe of the electorate (admittedly a swathe that has misunderstood that pensioners won’t actually be worse off annually) for no reason whatsoever?

Or does he simply want to be perceived to be inflicting misery on millions of “poor pensioners”?

Does he dislike old people?


Why do people think Labour are doing this?

I believe part of his thinking was people wouldn't care if they spin it as all old people are well off so it's a raid on the richer parts of the population.

He didn't expect this push back

 

[The Clamp]

I think this has been terribly managed, poorly timed and the reasoning somewhat vacuous. We are very well aware how socio-economic factors affect wellbeing and health and that this group will contain a higher proportion of people with complex needs and comorbidities. They will have deletorious outcomes as many above have observed as a result of this. This thinking could also lead to PIP being means tested, there must be many wealthy disabled people who could afford their own mobility car. Removing universallity seems to be a great way of polarising one group against another. In this case we don't have any idea what the "savings" will be used for. Perhaps a more honest presentation of where the money goes and how they want to spend before f*cking over their voters might be a good idea. This doesn't dispose me to thinking we have an honest and open government with a clear adgenda which would be nice given the previous shower of shit. I'm genuinely surprised how many people are happy to defend this one, a real paucity of compassion in my view.

Overheard a conversation the other day in a cafe.

Family with suitcases about to get on train to some holiday camp somewhere.

The mother was sorting her money out and was rather proud she’d saved her PIP up “that’ll be aside for ciggies and beers for the chalet”

Nice.

PIP is an appallingly run system. I’ve seen key-workers doing the paperwork to get their heroin addicted clients onto 10k in PIP back payments. And not just now and again. Two or three clients a week.
It desperately needs means testing and an overhaul in how it’s run.

 

[Bozza]

How about I go through your accounts and find £100 that you can't spend anymore on the basis that you'll get a few more pounds some time in the future.

He's right though - up to 2m pensioners will be looking to save £25 per month.

It's that eating or heating thing that some like to make such a fuss about.

 

[cjd]

I expect Labour to win the Commons vote, for Winter Fuel Payments to be scrapped and for everybody to move on. However, Labour's PR chief needs sacking.

To my mind, Labour should have had their Budget at the earliest opportunity, which would have been c. 12/13 September. They could have kept schtum until then, unleashed all the pain and taken all the negativity in one hit. But at least there would have been certainty moving forward, businesses, investors and the housing market could start planning and party conference could take the new plans into account and develop policy.

Instead, we've had Starmer's speech saying there will be great pain, then we've had this Winter Fuel Payment story, and we still have to wait another 7 weeks before the actual Budget.

This is spreading the pain and negativity over an extended period, one in which 5 Tory candidates for the leadership can each have a pop at Labour and magnify the Opposition response. In addition, Labour will be trying to end the public sector strikes with wage hikes but no one knows where the money is coming from, fanning the flames of uncertainty.

Labour have created a economic policy vacuum and it is not helping them. Maybe they should get Mandelson and Alistair Campbell back to sort this PR shitshow out?

I almost guarantee I could go through any pensioners monthly budget and save £25 a month for the next four or five months when they’ll all get an extra £450 a year off the government.

I'm quite sure you could. Why on earth would they need to feed a pet cat or dog......f*** 'em eh...?

I'm quite sure that most of us could go through almost anyones budget who lives on benefits and cull £25 from it. That isn't much of an answer. Many people who are on benefits suffer a lot because they are unable to budget better, or are pressed by needy children for what cannot be afforded etc etc etc. The list is endless. The point being, that not everyone is even capable of living to a strict budget and managing all the demands that life in the 21 st century western society has to deal with. It's tough for them.

It's also very tough for so many pensioners.

Is this the state you want...? Where all and sundry who can't budget like a middle-aged single man like yourself with no family responsibilities. Who is still relatively fit, mobile and very occasionally of a sound mind.....?

A caring society cares for all those who are vulnerable ( i.e; those who simply have done their very best but still fall short, young, middle aged and the elderly ).....not just those who have your obvious life skills.

 

[The Clamp]

How about I go through your accounts and find £100 that you can't spend anymore on the basis that you'll get a few more pounds some time in the future.

Take £100 off me over four months and then give me an extra £450 in March next year?

Absolutely. Deal.

 

[The Clamp]

I'm quite sure you could. Why on earth would they need to feed a pet cat or dog......f*** 'em eh...?

I'm quite sure that most of us could go through almost anyones budget who lives on benefits and cull £25 from it. That isn't much of an answer. Many people who are on benefits suffer a lot because they are unable to budget better, or are pressed by needy children for what cannot be afforded etc etc etc. The list is endless. The point being, that not everyone is even capable of living to a strict budget and managing all the demands that life in the 21 st century western society has to deal with. It's tough for them.

It's also very tough for so many pensioners.

Is this the state you want...? Where all and sundry who can't budget like a middle-aged single man like yourself with no family responsibilities. Who is still relatively fit, mobile and very occasionally of a sound mind.....?

A caring society cares for all those who are vulnerable ( i.e; those who simply have done their very best but still fall short, young, middle aged and the elderly ).....not just those who have your obvious life skills.

They are going to be fine.

People are painting this image of thousands of old folk being found dead with icicles hanging off their noses.

I think I’m going to leave this thread, it’s frankly hysterical nonsense.

 

[amexer]

I would be happier if there were a clearer cut way of making sure those that needed it got it, but there will always be some that just miss out.
The charity does have another interest though, in that a large number of pensioners that felt that they didn't need the extra money, donated it to charity.
This has f***ed up their annual marketing campaign to beg OAP's for their winter fuel payment cash.

Interesting I have a relative that rang up to say she didnt need it. Was told could not stop it so suggested she donated to charity. Maybe it would have been best if people had to apply for WFA and am sure many that didnt need it would not

 

[cjd]

I think I’m going to leave this thread, it’s frankly hysterical nonsense.

I think you need to. You are seriously out of your depth with reality on this particular subject..

Enjoy the footie tonight though...

 

[chip]

Overheard a conversation the other day in a cafe.

Family with suitcases about to get on train to some holiday camp somewhere.

The mother was sorting her money out and was rather proud she’d saved her PIP up “that’ll be aside for ciggies and beers for the chalet”

Nice.

PIP is an appallingly run system. I’ve seen key-workers doing the paperwork to get their heroin addicted clients onto 10k in PIP back payments. And not just now and again. Two or three clients a week.
It desperately needs means testing and an overhaul in how it’s run.

I'm glad you can find villans so easily not sure about how well you understnad disadvantage and inequality. That reads like peak 80s Tory boy suff. Enjoy your break

 

[Baldseagull]

I think this has been terribly managed, poorly timed and the reasoning somewhat vacuous. We are very well aware how socio-economic factors affect wellbeing and health and that this group will contain a higher proportion of people with complex needs and comorbidities. They will have deletorious outcomes as many above have observed as a result of this. This thinking could also lead to PIP being means tested, there must be many wealthy disabled people who could afford their own mobility car. Removing universallity seems to be a great way of polarising one group against another. In this case we don't have any idea what the "savings" will be used for. Perhaps a more honest presentation of where the money goes and how they want to spend before f*cking over their voters might be a good idea. This doesn't dispose me to thinking we have an honest and open government with a clear adgenda which would be nice given the previous shower of shit. I'm genuinely surprised how many people are happy to defend this one, a real paucity of compassion in my view.

I don't think anyone wants to see anyone struggle to keep warm this winter, or worry about debt, clearly there are a large number of oaps that don't need the extra payments, and I think it's fair to stop the payments to them, I think most agree on that point. The argument is over how to ensure those in need receive and those that don't, don't. I think the Labour policy sounds fair at first hearing, but it's becoming clearer that the cut off is going to hit quite a lot of people that are just getting by.

 

[Mellor 3 Ward 4]

The Tory Party implemented some pretty Draconian policies on the Disabled community, as part of their austerity measures.
There was plenty of outcry from various sources, but nowhere near as much as this.

The Tories were F***ing useless self-serving T**ts who quite rightly took a good kicking at the last election.

The Labour Party should be better than this - yet only one MP (that's not alrady suspended) had the balls to not vote against it.

No doubt the others will trot out the 'difficult decision' b*****ks, but it ain't gonna wash with me.

Dreadful decision (and even worse PR but that's another story)

 

[KZNSeagull]

I don't think anyone wants to see anyone struggle to keep warm this winter, or worry about debt, clearly there are a large number of oaps that don't need the extra payments, and I think it's fair to stop the payments to them, I think most agree on that point. The argument is over how to ensure those in need receive and those that don't, don't. I think the Labour policy sounds fair at first hearing, but it's becoming clearer that the cut off is going to hit quite a lot of people that are just getting by.

HMRC know which pensioners pay higher rate tax so, in the absence of a proper means testing system, make that the cut off instead for now.