Pensioners face ‘death sentence to cut winter fuel payments’

Millions of pensioners are set to “really struggle” this winter as the government plans to scrap the Winter Fuel Payment of up to £300. Leading charities have sounded the alarm, warning the move will cause significant hardship and pose a health risk to vulnerable people who cannot afford to heat their homes.

One organization even went so far as to say it could be a “death sentence” for the sick and elderly, whose conditions could worsen without adequate heating. In a surprise turn of events, Chancellor Rachel Reeves has announced that the Winter Fuel Payment will be stopped for all pensioners except those receiving Pension Credit and certain other means-tested benefits.

Age UK pointed out that the worst affected will be the 800,000-900,000 highly vulnerable people who qualify for Pension Credit but are not currently receiving it. The charity attributed this largely to the complex application process, which is mired in red tape and includes a staggering 243 questions.

Simon Francis, co-ordinator of the End Fuel Poverty Coalition, which represents several charities, said: “When Rishi Sunak threatened to scrap Winter Fuel Payments in September 2023, I said this could be a death sentence for pensioners who only manage to keep away. Nothing changed. Energy prices are still high, people are still struggling with the cost of living and this dangerous decision by the Chancellor could condemn pensioners to living in damp housing.

“Figures for the Warm This Winter campaign suggest that around 41% of over 75s could now see their winter heating budget ripped to shreds as they are on modest incomes and will now be ineligible to pay. The Chancellor needs to urgently think and consult with older people’s charities about a better way of targeting this support to a wider group of pensioners.”

Age UK charity director Caroline Abrahams said: “We are strongly opposed to means testing the Winter Fuel Payment (WFP) as our initial estimate is that up to two million pensioners who badly need money to keep warm in winter they won’t get it and will have problems as a result, but at the other end of the spectrum, the wealthy elderly will barely notice the difference, a social injustice.”

She added: “A major reason for this disastrous result is that more than one in three pensioners who are entitled to Pension Credit, the WFP-eligible benefit under this proposal, do not receive it, a proportion that has been roughly constant by many years. more than 800,000 older people living on very low incomes of less than £218.25 a week for single pensioners and less than £332.95 for couples who are already missing out on the Pension Credit they are entitled to in order to and increase income, they will now lose the PAM that helps them pay their fuel bills.

“In addition, there are around one million pensioners whose weekly income is less than £50 above the poverty line who will also be hit hard by the loss of the payment. Older people in this group often tell us that they are really struggling financially; the proposed change will make it even harder for them to afford to stay warm when it gets cold.

“Finally, there is a third group who will find it extremely difficult to heat their homes adequately this winter as a result of the proposed change: older people whose incomes are slightly higher, though still limited , but who live in energy-inefficient homes and/or who feel seriously ill and need to keep the thermostat up to protect their health.

“It’s well established that retirees tend to do everything they can to avoid going into debt, so if they’re worried about their future energy bills, we know their answer is likely to be to rationalize their fuel consumption and save by reducing spending on other essential products. Therefore, this proposed policy change is sure to lead to a dire ‘food or heat’ dilemma for many older people.”

She criticized the decision, saying: “Testing the WFP’s means this winter, with virtually no notice and no countermeasures to protect poor and vulnerable pensioners, is the wrong policy decision and one that will put their health as well as their finances at risk. The last thing they or the NHS need With winter now almost on the horizon, the government should stop the WFP’s proposed change and think again, given the clear evidence of how it will hurt older people who have the greatest need for her.

Rachel Reeves argued the change was needed to address a deficit in government finances left by the previous Conservative administration. It is expected to save £1.4 billion this year and £1.5 billion next year, reducing the number of beneficiaries from around 10 million to 1.5 million households. The chancellor admitted the decision was a “difficult” one he did not want to make. However, she argued that it is essential for economic stability.