|
Post by oggyoggy on Sept 5, 2024 6:13:17 GMT
He is a pioneer of green energy, starting his business many years ago (1995). He will have been benefiting from green subsidies long before he first made a donation to the Labour Party (last year I believe) and long before this government came into power. He had previously made donations to the Green party who he endorsed in 2015. But he endorsed labour in 2019. So those headlines are misleading and suggest corruption of some sort, which isn’t true. I like Dale Vince. Mostly because his divorce was a famous case with an interesting point of law of interest to me as a divorce lawyer, and because he seems one of the good football club owners (he owns Forest Green of course). He has said some controversial things about Hamas.
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Sept 5, 2024 7:00:58 GMT
www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/sep/05/ministers-introduce-plans-to-remove-all-hereditary-peers-from-lordsAnother good move from this Labour government. Starting the reforms that are needed to our country by banishing hereditary peers once and for all. The Lords isn’t by any means perfect, but it has knocked sense into Parliament on many occasions making the elected house rethink legislation being passed easily by majorities in the elected house, before relenting as it always does to the elected house. At least with these changes there will be no birthright to be a member and so leaders in their respective fields in business, health, law, education (and sadly politics) will fill the Lords instead. Many far more qualified than our elected officials to be making decisions about laws in our country. A Stoke City season ticket holder in there has been campaigning for this for years, about bloody time, it's an archaic throwback.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Sept 5, 2024 23:56:47 GMT
He is a pioneer of green energy, starting his business many years ago (1995). He will have been benefiting from green subsidies long before he first made a donation to the Labour Party (last year I believe) and long before this government came into power. He had previously made donations to the Green party who he endorsed in 2015. But he endorsed labour in 2019. So those headlines are misleading and suggest corruption of some sort, which isn’t true. I like Dale Vince. Mostly because his divorce was a famous case with an interesting point of law of interest to me as a divorce lawyer, and because he seems one of the good football club owners (he owns Forest Green of course). He has said some controversial things about Hamas.
Absolutely, the headline is utterly pathetic.
|
|
|
Post by iancransonsknees on Sept 7, 2024 1:35:30 GMT
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Sept 7, 2024 6:39:18 GMT
He is a pioneer of green energy, starting his business many years ago (1995). He will have been benefiting from green subsidies long before he first made a donation to the Labour Party (last year I believe) and long before this government came into power. He had previously made donations to the Green party who he endorsed in 2015. But he endorsed labour in 2019. So those headlines are misleading and suggest corruption of some sort, which isn’t true. I like Dale Vince. Mostly because his divorce was a famous case with an interesting point of law of interest to me as a divorce lawyer, and because he seems one of the good football club owners (he owns Forest Green of course). He has said some controversial things about Hamas. Absolutely, the headline is utterly pathetic.
Can’t disagree What the hell has a dick with a shit football team where you can’t get a decent meat pie ( quite a few other clubs apply) Got to do with the pensioner freezer
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Sept 8, 2024 9:58:49 GMT
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Sept 8, 2024 10:05:08 GMT
Breaking with recent parliament tradition somewhat here. What's happened to the lengthy reply containing no answer to the question but lots of word salad we'd got used to? 🤔
|
|
|
Post by flea79 on Sept 8, 2024 14:55:35 GMT
Absolutely, the headline is utterly pathetic.
Can’t disagree What the hell has a dick with a shit football team where you can’t get a decent meat pie ( quite a few other clubs apply) Got to do with the pensioner freezer I really fancy a pie now! The corner shop awaits!
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Sept 8, 2024 16:56:55 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Sept 9, 2024 4:31:38 GMT
|
|
|
Post by iancransonsknees on Sept 9, 2024 4:46:01 GMT
They haven't got the bollocks. They'll just abstain.
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Sept 9, 2024 7:24:51 GMT
Everyone who doesn’t vote to stop the cut Should be named and shamed as pensioner freezers
If they abstain there voting for the cut
|
|
|
Post by superjw on Sept 9, 2024 7:42:00 GMT
Everyone who doesn’t vote to stop the cut Should be named and shamed as pensioner freezers If they abstain there voting for the cut They will abstain because they care only about themselves and the safety of their position in government, that’s it.
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Sept 9, 2024 10:20:19 GMT
I was at a conference on Saturday, largely attended by silver-headed people like myself. The annoyance with the new government treatment of pensioners was huge and quite breathtaking. People feel they have been cheated and totally misled by all politicians. I fully expect this groundswell of opinion to be felt by the government and expect they will do a U turn. My guess is they will wait till the budget, announce all the tax increases and say, with that extra revenue, they will be able to restore the winter fuel allowance. Just speculation on my part.
|
|
|
Post by Ariel Manto on Sept 9, 2024 10:41:27 GMT
I was at a conference on Saturday, largely attended by silver-headed people like myself. The annoyance with the new government treatment of pensioners was huge and quite breathtaking. People feel they have been cheated and totally misled by all politicians. I fully expect this groundswell of opinion to be felt by the government and expect they will do a U turn. My guess is they will wait till the budget, announce all the tax increases and say, with that extra revenue, they will be able to restore the winter fuel allowance. Just speculation on my part. Outside of the usual hysteria, it'll soon calm down when people realise that all Labour are doing is turning the Winter Fuel Allowance from a "right to all pensioners" to a means tested benefit which is common sense. This idea that any pensioner, even if they own and live in their own castle whilst simultaneously renting their other properties out across the UK needs their Winter Fuel Allowance just as much as an elderly lady on her own in a council flat is ridiculous and nonsensical. The Winter Fuel Allowance should ONLY be given to those who need it.
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Sept 9, 2024 10:43:46 GMT
They should means test free prescriptions for over 60s, there's surely lots of people between 60 and 67 with houses paid for and a decent salary or pension.
Keeping needy pensioners warm is a bigger priority than giving free prescriptions to those that can easily afford them.
|
|
|
Post by knype on Sept 9, 2024 11:28:46 GMT
Ah good old Labour and means testing everything!
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Sept 9, 2024 11:29:59 GMT
Ah good old Labour and means testing everything! Presumably you support universal income then? Should benefits be means tested?
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Sept 9, 2024 11:31:19 GMT
They should means test free prescriptions for over 60s, there's surely lots of people between 60 and 67 with houses paid for and a decent salary or pension. Keeping needy pensioners warm is a bigger priority than giving free prescriptions to those that can easily afford them. Absolutely. Average pensioners take home more than average workers nowadays. Give to the poor and tax more from the rich. It shouldn’t change just because of age.
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Sept 9, 2024 11:31:52 GMT
Ah good old Labour and means testing everything! Your usual eloquent and well referenced argument has me convinced yet again! I take it all back, silly idea...
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Sept 9, 2024 11:33:22 GMT
I was at a conference on Saturday, largely attended by silver-headed people like myself. The annoyance with the new government treatment of pensioners was huge and quite breathtaking. People feel they have been cheated and totally misled by all politicians. I fully expect this groundswell of opinion to be felt by the government and expect they will do a U turn. My guess is they will wait till the budget, announce all the tax increases and say, with that extra revenue, they will be able to restore the winter fuel allowance. Just speculation on my part. Outside of the usual hysteria, it'll soon calm down when people realise that all Labour are doing is turning the Winter Fuel Allowance from a "right to all pensioners" to a means tested benefit which is common sense. This idea that any pensioner, even if they own and live in their own castle whilst simultaneously renting their other properties out across the UK needs their Winter Fuel Allowance just as much as an elderly lady on her own in a council flat is ridiculous and nonsensical. The Winter Fuel Allowance should ONLY be given to those who need it. Absolutely. Like other benefits. The argument should be about the level of income and capital that means you need it.
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Sept 9, 2024 11:37:53 GMT
means testing is all well and good, often it costs more to do so
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Sept 9, 2024 11:49:13 GMT
personally i would not allow millionaire pensioners any benefits anything. I would love to take the state pension off richard branson and alan sugar to increase pensions and pension credit for the less well off. I suspect the costs would outweigh the benefits but it would be morally right
but how do you say to a pensioner with a massive public service pension of over £50k we are taking your state pension and other retirement benefits off you? but at the same time not touch millionaire pensioners who recieve income via compeny dividents or other assets? Very tough to administrate.
Maybe the fairest is to do it via council tax rebates for certain bands? i dont know
hence the original decison being wrong
|
|
|
Post by Clayton Wood on Sept 9, 2024 12:52:50 GMT
Remove the 2 child cap on child benefit and means test it all on a sliding scale. The more you breed the less you need.
All in favour say 'aye'
|
|
|
Post by iancransonsknees on Sept 9, 2024 13:24:03 GMT
Democracy in action for you.
|
|
|
Post by iancransonsknees on Sept 9, 2024 13:32:59 GMT
I really wouldn't give half as many fucks if they weren't such hypocritical cunts.
|
|
|
Post by gawa on Sept 9, 2024 13:50:19 GMT
They should means test free prescriptions for over 60s, there's surely lots of people between 60 and 67 with houses paid for and a decent salary or pension. Keeping needy pensioners warm is a bigger priority than giving free prescriptions to those that can easily afford them. They should be getting both just like people of all ages get free prescriptions in Wales, Scotland and N Ireland. Don't let the Westminster elite let you think its one or the other.
|
|
|
Post by gawa on Sept 9, 2024 13:53:23 GMT
I really wouldn't give half as many fucks if they weren't such hypocritical cunts. Brilliant video 🤣🤣.
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Sept 9, 2024 14:50:43 GMT
It is very easy to spend someone else's money
Benefits should be targeted and not universal
There are about 12M Pensioners in UK and 2M 16% of them live in poverty calculated in UK at *60% of median income. Astonishingly about one third of the 2M who do qualify for Pensions Credit and thus Fuel Allowance are not claiming it. Labour is putting a concerted effort in ensuring they do claim it.
There are slightly more children under 16 than Pensioners at 12.7M in UK but a whopping 4.3M 34% live in poverty by the same 60% of Median Income
There are 3M 25% Pensioners in UK classified as Millionaires many via Property Assets. These form part of the 10M Pensioners we hear about losing a £200 a year Fuel Allowance
I am not trying to play off Pensioners against Children but the first priority should be to lift the 2M Pensioners and 4.3M Children out of relative poverty
*I also have an issue with the measurement of poverty in UK because there are some very high net worth individuals at the top by the time you get to the middle it's a relatively low number and 60% of that is pathetic and we should have a much more ambitious target
Stokeson made a very astute and much overlooked Post a few days ago where he suggested Labour will most likely link Housing Benefits to Fuel Allowance such that many more than the 2M Pensioners will be benefit but not the 3M Asset Rich Millionaires
Labour must also urgently tackle Child Poverty but again it shouldn't be based on the number of children you have but on need. When Jacob Rees-Mogg decided to have six children that was a personal choice but he shouldn't receive State Benefits for doing so.
I have to admit from a PR Standpoint although removing Universal Benefits are the right thing to do Labour have made a complete Pigs Ear of this akin to Maggie Thatcher, Milk Snatcher. They can recover and I expect they will not to repair their reputation but because it's the right thing to do.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Sept 9, 2024 15:28:20 GMT
It is very easy to spend someone else's money Benefits should be targeted and not universal There are about 12M Pensioners in UK and 2M 16% of them live in poverty calculated in UK at *60% of median income. Astonishingly about one third of the 2M who do qualify for Pensions Credit and thus Fuel Allowance are not claiming it. Labour is putting a concerted effort in ensuring they do claim it. There are slightly more children under 16 than Pensioners at 12.7M in UK but a whopping 4.3M 34% live in poverty by the same 60% of Median Income There are 3M 25% Pensioners in UK classified as Millionaires many via Property Assets. These form part of the 10M Pensioners we hear about losing a £200 a year Fuel Allowance I am not trying to play off Pensioners against Children but the first priority should be to lift the 2M Pensioners and 4.3M Children out of relative poverty *I also have an issue with the measurement of poverty in UK because there are some very high net worth individuals at the top by the time you get to the middle it's a relatively low number and 60% of that is pathetic and we should have a much more ambitious target Stokeson made a very astute and much overlooked Post a few days ago where he suggested Labour will most likely link Housing Benefits to Fuel Allowance such that many more than the 2M Pensioners will be benefit but not the 3M Asset Rich Millionaires Labour must also urgently tackle Child Poverty but again it shouldn't be based on the number of children you have but on need. When Jacob Rees-Mogg decided to have six children that was a personal choice but he shouldn't receive State Benefits for doing so. I have to admit from a PR Standpoint although removing Universal Benefits are the right thing to do Labour have made a complete Pigs Ear of this akin to Maggie Thatcher, Milk Snatcher. They can recover and I expect they will not to repair their reputation but because it's the right thing to do. Thank you for providing the stats and confirming exactly what I thought and why I have defended means testing this benefit. The question that should be asked is at what level of income and capital these pensioners be able to claim the winter fuel payments. The rich don’t need it and shouldn’t get it.
|
|