Vocal Voices

Labour beat the Conservative's motion to scrap the cut by 348 to 228.votes. This was always on the cards despite many rebels. The numbers in receipt will now drop from about 11.4 million to 1.5 million. It will put some pensioners in difficulty, no doubt about that, but it should have always been means-tested. Apparently there is a safety net for the very poorest.

However, I think this all points to Labour's plan. That is to do the unpopular things, make the cuts, especially early on, in order to get the UK finances back on track. Do them in the first six months or so as that gives them nearly four years for us to forget them come the next general election. It's a risky strategy and I bet we can expect more over the winter and into spring.

And meanwhile the treasury gave billions to overseas aid last month

-
Apparently it is being trotted out that pensioners will be getting a rise next April of £460 by way of the triple lock. What they don't say is that only pensioners retiring after 2016 will get that amount. Most pensioners retired before that date and are on tthe old basic state pension and will get less. Taking a guess it could be around £300 - the amount they will not be receiving this winter. So looking at it in this way, these pensioners will be no better off i.e. take with one hand and give back with the other. In addition this rise may well bring them up to the limit of the personal allowance at £12,750 so it will be liable for tax. Not much of a pension increase there - and most will be on a fixed income which is below the national living wage.

That true no better off

I agree that Labour are getting the unpopular stuff out of the way first, it makes political sense.
But fixing the economy I very much doubt. £2 billion saved on the WFA but they've already commited to above average pay rises and Miliband is checking money around like nothing; £500 million subsidy scheme for Port Talbot, doubling the subsidies for wind farms, etc.
I'm not looking forward to next year's council tax bill either.

All OAPs should get the same pension - none of this "if you were born before" garbage.

No state pension (OAP) takes anyone over the £12,750 personal tax allowance, so no tax to pay. These are just emotive claims. Many pensioners do have other private pensions, but not all. Some are worth £thousands.x 10s.

Many of us. like me, might be on less than the living wage, but some of us do get HB, a travel pass, free prescriptions, free dental (if we can find a dentist) and lots of other discounts- if we look for them. Help is there. Please do not do the emotive "heating and eating" thing as it only applies to the very few.

Cutting the WFA is not to good, I get that, but millions are not going to die because of it.

cromwell wrote:I agree that Labour are getting the unpopular stuff out of the way first, it makes political sense.

What's starting to bother me is what's coming down the line next ......

cromwell wrote:I'm not looking forward to next year's council tax bill either.

Neither am I. We are living in one of the highest-charging counties in the country here, and the county council are appalling. Sky-high rates and they still can't maintain the roads properly.
A brand-new manhole cover installed a couple of months ago, on the main road right at the entrance to the new estate being built, has just collapsed and we're back to traffic lights for the umpteenth time this year.

Frankly I think it's despicable.

What, Jen? The cut?

Not all pensioners need the WFA, I accept that. I don't. So target it to those that are in need of it. Don't "scatter gun" it to all and sundry - millionaires etc. Give it to those in real need. Is that a problem?

It's a simple concept...

It will be the single persons c council tax next