|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Sept 10, 2024 15:35:28 GMT
Well..technically 1 Labour MP backed the motion to reinstate all winter fuel payments to all pensioners. 53 Labour MPs did not vote - with around 45 Labour MPs abstaining - although details of pairing still need to be confirmed One Labour mp voted against the cut Every other Labour mp voted not to stop the cut end of a bunch of Lilly livered self serving tossers |
|
|
|
Post by crouchpotato1 on Sept 10, 2024 15:39:47 GMT
52 abstained
Wankers of the highest order
|
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Sept 10, 2024 15:40:23 GMT
Imagine the conservatives taking £300 off old people you'd be paralytic with rage. Labour has not taken £300 off old people. It has changed the eligibility for a state benefit. Nobody has had money taken away. You are not at all arguing your reasons why you think all old people, regardless as to whether or not they may be a millionaire, should receive state benefits purely because of their age. I think you have really lost the plot with that first sentence. There are millions of pensioners who don't need the winter fuel supplement, but there are millions who do. There are millions of pensioners who have served their country, paid their taxes and now because they are old, they stay in more, cannot venture into the cold air or risk slipping on ice, need to keep their bodies warmer than young people, are unable to take exercise, and have less natural insulation in terms of body fat layer or hair. Many may have more income than the minimum level for supplementary support, but live in draughty, low insulated properties and have old inefficient heaters. There is no reasonable method of determining whether one old person needs the extra payment or not, everyone has different circumstances and needs, it is not purely a question of their income. There are many who qualify but don't apply for supplementary income because of something the young generation don't understand - pride. I remember my old Dad proudly claiming, he had never owed a penny to anyone. It wasn't literally true but there are many old people who will not ask for help or what they consider "charity". They expect to be treated properly without having to ask. I think the government have made a serious error of judgement on this issue. It is probably as big an error as Thatcher's error on pushing for a poll tax. Labour MPs are going to get hounded to death by their constituents for years to come, and it should be remembered they are only in power because the Tories messed up and lost support to third parties like LibDems, and the SNP also messed up, not because there was a groundswell of support for Labour. I don't think this topic is going to go away and even if the government suddenly find some cash down the back of the sofa and do a U turn, people will remember how they were treated, or, how their mum and dad were treated. Rant over. |
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Sept 10, 2024 15:40:44 GMT
52 abstained Wankers of the highest order I see Dianne Abbot didnt vote |
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Sept 10, 2024 15:43:44 GMT
Labour has not taken £300 off old people. It has changed the eligibility for a state benefit. Nobody has had money taken away. You are not at all arguing your reasons why you think all old people, regardless as to whether or not they may be a millionaire, should receive state benefits purely because of their age. I think you have really lost the plot with that first sentence. There are millions of pensioners who don't need the winter fuel supplement, but there are millions who do. There are millions of pensioners who have served their country, paid their taxes and now because they are old, they stay in more, cannot venture into the cold air or risk slipping on ice, need to keep their bodies warmer than young people, are unable to take exercise, and have less natural insulation in terms of body fat layer or hair. Many may have more income than the minimum level for supplementary support, but live in draughty, low insulated properties and have old inefficient heaters. There is no reasonable method of determining whether one old person needs the extra payment or not, everyone has different circumstances and needs, it is not purely a question of their income. There are many who qualify but don't apply for supplementary income because of something the young generation don't understand - pride. I remember my old Dad proudly claiming, he had never owed a penny to anyone. It wasn't literally true but there are many old people who will not ask for help or what they consider "charity". They expect to be treated properly without having to ask. I think the government have made a serious error of judgement on this issue. It is probably as big an error as Thatcher's error on pushing for a poll tax. Labour MPs are going to get hounded to death by their constituents for years to come, and it should be remembered they are only in power because the Tories messed up and lost support to third parties like LibDems, and the SNP also messed up, not because there was a groundswell of support for Labour. I don't think this topic is going to go away and even if the government suddenly find some cash down the back of the sofa and do a U turn, people will remember how they were treated, or, how their mum and dad were treated. Rant over. Its not a rant, i fully agree with you. In five years the tories will have the reversal of this in their manifesto |
|
|
|
Post by crouchpotato1 on Sept 10, 2024 15:45:17 GMT
52 abstained Wankers of the highest order I see Dianne Abbot didnt vote As I said wankers of the highest order🤮 Mother of the house🙄utterly laughable along with the rest of these cnuts |
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Sept 10, 2024 15:46:56 GMT
Labour has not taken £300 off old people. It has changed the eligibility for a state benefit. Nobody has had money taken away. You are not at all arguing your reasons why you think all old people, regardless as to whether or not they may be a millionaire, should receive state benefits purely because of their age. I think you have really lost the plot with that first sentence. There are millions of pensioners who don't need the winter fuel supplement, but there are millions who do. There are millions of pensioners who have served their country, paid their taxes and now because they are old, they stay in more, cannot venture into the cold air or risk slipping on ice, need to keep their bodies warmer than young people, are unable to take exercise, and have less natural insulation in terms of body fat layer or hair. Many may have more income than the minimum level for supplementary support, but live in draughty, low insulated properties and have old inefficient heaters. There is no reasonable method of determining whether one old person needs the extra payment or not, everyone has different circumstances and needs, it is not purely a question of their income. There are many who qualify but don't apply for supplementary income because of something the young generation don't understand - pride. I remember my old Dad proudly claiming, he had never owed a penny to anyone. It wasn't literally true but there are many old people who will not ask for help or what they consider "charity". They expect to be treated properly without having to ask. I think the government have made a serious error of judgement on this issue. It is probably as big an error as Thatcher's error on pushing for a poll tax. Labour MPs are going to get hounded to death by their constituents for years to come, and it should be remembered they are only in power because the Tories messed up and lost support to third parties like LibDems, and the SNP also messed up, not because there was a groundswell of support for Labour. I don't think this topic is going to go away and even if the government suddenly find some cash down the back of the sofa and do a U turn, people will remember how they were treated, or, how their mum and dad were treated. Rant over. I’ve lost the plot by stating what has happened!? |
|
|
|
Post by mickeythemaestro on Sept 10, 2024 15:51:50 GMT
Labour has not taken £300 off old people. It has changed the eligibility for a state benefit. Nobody has had money taken away. You are not at all arguing your reasons why you think all old people, regardless as to whether or not they may be a millionaire, should receive state benefits purely because of their age. I think you have really lost the plot with that first sentence. There are millions of pensioners who don't need the winter fuel supplement, but there are millions who do. There are millions of pensioners who have served their country, paid their taxes and now because they are old, they stay in more, cannot venture into the cold air or risk slipping on ice, need to keep their bodies warmer than young people, are unable to take exercise, and have less natural insulation in terms of body fat layer or hair. Many may have more income than the minimum level for supplementary support, but live in draughty, low insulated properties and have old inefficient heaters. There is no reasonable method of determining whether one old person needs the extra payment or not, everyone has different circumstances and needs, it is not purely a question of their income. There are many who qualify but don't apply for supplementary income because of something the young generation don't understand - pride. I remember my old Dad proudly claiming, he had never owed a penny to anyone. It wasn't literally true but there are many old people who will not ask for help or what they consider "charity". They expect to be treated properly without having to ask. I think the government have made a serious error of judgement on this issue. It is probably as big an error as Thatcher's error on pushing for a poll tax. Labour MPs are going to get hounded to death by their constituents for years to come, and it should be remembered they are only in power because the Tories messed up and lost support to third parties like LibDems, and the SNP also messed up, not because there was a groundswell of support for Labour. I don't think this topic is going to go away and even if the government suddenly find some cash down the back of the sofa and do a U turn, people will remember how they were treated, or, how their mum and dad were treated. Rant over. Yet that prick Starmer will rock up at the next ww2 memorial event for his photo ops. I hope some good old veteran bops him on the nose really hard with his walking frame. Gosh maybe I'm inciting violence and Starmer will be sending the cops round 😆 |
|
|
|
Post by crouchpotato1 on Sept 10, 2024 15:52:01 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by crouchpotato1 on Sept 10, 2024 15:55:09 GMT
Fair play to Jon Trickett who had morals
|
|
|
|
Post by superjw on Sept 10, 2024 15:59:34 GMT
The optics are really not great for Starmer and Labour, making this move right on top of the precipice of their energy regulator increasing the cost of energy for millions of people. All while there being other options to go after first.
It’s far too easy for the conservatives this, they simply just add the reversal of this to their manifesto in 5 years.
|
|
|
|
Post by stokeson on Sept 10, 2024 16:35:23 GMT
The optics are really not great for Starmer and Labour, making this move right on top of the precipice of their energy regulator increasing the cost of energy for millions of people. All while there being other options to go after first. It’s far too easy for the conservatives this, they simply just add the reversal of this to their manifesto in 5 years. The optics are great for Starmer. Not bending to the unions. Making good fiscal decisions and making his party tow the line. Good strong leadership..... |
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Sept 10, 2024 16:47:37 GMT
I think you have really lost the plot with that first sentence. There are millions of pensioners who don't need the winter fuel supplement, but there are millions who do. There are millions of pensioners who have served their country, paid their taxes and now because they are old, they stay in more, cannot venture into the cold air or risk slipping on ice, need to keep their bodies warmer than young people, are unable to take exercise, and have less natural insulation in terms of body fat layer or hair. Many may have more income than the minimum level for supplementary support, but live in draughty, low insulated properties and have old inefficient heaters. There is no reasonable method of determining whether one old person needs the extra payment or not, everyone has different circumstances and needs, it is not purely a question of their income. There are many who qualify but don't apply for supplementary income because of something the young generation don't understand - pride. I remember my old Dad proudly claiming, he had never owed a penny to anyone. It wasn't literally true but there are many old people who will not ask for help or what they consider "charity". They expect to be treated properly without having to ask. I think the government have made a serious error of judgement on this issue. It is probably as big an error as Thatcher's error on pushing for a poll tax. Labour MPs are going to get hounded to death by their constituents for years to come, and it should be remembered they are only in power because the Tories messed up and lost support to third parties like LibDems, and the SNP also messed up, not because there was a groundswell of support for Labour. I don't think this topic is going to go away and even if the government suddenly find some cash down the back of the sofa and do a U turn, people will remember how they were treated, or, how their mum and dad were treated. Rant over. Yet that prick Starmer will rock up at the next ww2 memorial event for his photo ops. I hope some good old veteran bops him on the nose really hard with his walking frame. Gosh maybe I'm inciting violence and Starmer will be sending the cops round 😆 To be fair to him, about the stupidest thing he could do as PM is not go to the next WW2 memorial. He’s PM. It is part of his duty. See what happened to Sunak for leaving the D-Day memorials early! I don’t think it is fair to judge him for attending those types of things. |
|
|
|
Post by mickeythemaestro on Sept 10, 2024 16:52:12 GMT
Yet that prick Starmer will rock up at the next ww2 memorial event for his photo ops. I hope some good old veteran bops him on the nose really hard with his walking frame. Gosh maybe I'm inciting violence and Starmer will be sending the cops round 😆 To be fair to him, about the stupidest thing he could do as PM is not go to the next WW2 memorial. He’s PM. It is part of his duty. See what happened to Sunak for leaving the D-Day memorials early! I don’t think it is fair to judge him for attending those types of things. Aye, fair 👍 |
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Sept 10, 2024 16:56:16 GMT
Labour has not taken £300 off old people. It has changed the eligibility for a state benefit. Nobody has had money taken away. You are not at all arguing your reasons why you think all old people, regardless as to whether or not they may be a millionaire, should receive state benefits purely because of their age. I think you have really lost the plot with that first sentence. There are millions of pensioners who don't need the winter fuel supplement, but there are millions who do. There are millions of pensioners who have served their country, paid their taxes and now because they are old, they stay in more, cannot venture into the cold air or risk slipping on ice, need to keep their bodies warmer than young people, are unable to take exercise, and have less natural insulation in terms of body fat layer or hair. Many may have more income than the minimum level for supplementary support, but live in draughty, low insulated properties and have old inefficient heaters. There is no reasonable method of determining whether one old person needs the extra payment or not, everyone has different circumstances and needs, it is not purely a question of their income. There are many who qualify but don't apply for supplementary income because of something the young generation don't understand - pride. I remember my old Dad proudly claiming, he had never owed a penny to anyone. It wasn't literally true but there are many old people who will not ask for help or what they consider "charity". They expect to be treated properly without having to ask. I think the government have made a serious error of judgement on this issue. It is probably as big an error as Thatcher's error on pushing for a poll tax. Labour MPs are going to get hounded to death by their constituents for years to come, and it should be remembered they are only in power because the Tories messed up and lost support to third parties like LibDems, and the SNP also messed up, not because there was a groundswell of support for Labour. I don't think this topic is going to go away and even if the government suddenly find some cash down the back of the sofa and do a U turn, people will remember how they were treated, or, how their mum and dad were treated. Rant over. If Labour do what they have said they will do: address the draughty and poorly insulated properties you mention, reduce energy bills and general improve life and society as they said they would, taking free handouts away from many who don’t need it, and some who do, will not be seen as a mistake at all. Let’s see if the some who do need the payments who won’t be getting them in future (there aren’t going to be that many, but any is obviously bad) will be assisted in the budget. The very fact that this policy is making those eligible apply for what they can claim is an extremely good thing. |
|
|
|
Post by lawrieleslie on Sept 10, 2024 16:58:39 GMT
Imagine the conservatives taking £300 off old people you'd be paralytic with rage. Labour has not taken £300 off old people. It has changed the eligibility for a state benefit. Nobody has had money taken away. You are not at all arguing your reasons why you think all old people, regardless as to whether or not they may be a millionaire, should receive state benefits purely because of their age. But they have had the money taken away and here’s why….many pensioners on a shoestring budget will have factored in the £200 or £300 allowance for this winter but now it’s been taken away they will have to meet the shortfall some other way and that is very wrong and even cruel. If the benefit was to be cut then it should have been phased in next year to give pensioners a chance to adjust their budgets over a greater period and not the 4 months that Reeves has done. It would also have given the government the opportunity to means test the WFA more fairly and considerately. |
|
|
|
Post by Gawa on Sept 10, 2024 17:00:47 GMT
52 abstained Wankers of the highest order I see Dianne Abbot didnt vote Abstained in the two child benefit one too. I've given her a strongly worded tweet  |
|
|
|
Post by Gawa on Sept 10, 2024 17:02:42 GMT
Fair play to Jon Trickett who had morals Not the only one. But the others have all had their whip removed already so don't get reported as a labour vote. |
|
|
|
Post by Gawa on Sept 10, 2024 17:04:02 GMT
So which pensioners do get the payment now? What is the cap?
|
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Sept 10, 2024 17:12:52 GMT
Labour has not taken £300 off old people. It has changed the eligibility for a state benefit. Nobody has had money taken away. You are not at all arguing your reasons why you think all old people, regardless as to whether or not they may be a millionaire, should receive state benefits purely because of their age. But they have had the money taken away and here’s why….many pensioners on a shoestring budget will have factored in the £200 or £300 allowance for this winter but now it’s been taken away they will have to meet the shortfall some other way and that is very wrong and even cruel. If the benefit was to be cut then it should have been phased in next year to give pensioners a chance to adjust their budgets over a greater period and not the 4 months that Reeves has done. It would also have given the government the opportunity to means test the WFA more fairly and considerately. I agree that they could have phased it out or reviewed a way of administering it at a higher income threshold cut off. But nobody has had money taken from them. It would be very different had the benefit been paid and was being clawed back, which is not happening. I suspect most who are in desperate need are getting it still. |
|
|
|
Post by crouchpotato1 on Sept 10, 2024 17:17:23 GMT
All 53 cowards
|
|
|
|
Post by ravey123 on Sept 10, 2024 17:21:54 GMT
Tell that to the families of some extra pensioners who may die this winter over a fear of not put the heating on. I know I can't prove this or it is not a definite but any decent person with a modicum on common sense will know this will happen Perhaps the pensioner should just keep the heating on, not die, and use the additional cash they are getting with the state pension increases to cover it (and have change leftover). Or the families can put their hands in their pockets if they really are that concerned. I would if I was concerned about an elderly relative because of this. Remember, the budget hasn’t yet been announced so I don’t think people need to be too dramatic quite yet. Forgive me but i thought the state pension increase was to cover rising living costs - cant have it both ways. What if the family cant afford to pay? The most disgusting thing about this that Labour always planned to do this but didnt have the minerals to put it in their manifesto. As others have said - if this was the Tories there would have been hell up. I suppose we’ll gave to see how they mitigate it at the budget. Wouldn’t it just be easier to make the pension the same value as the living wage - by definition the living wage is what is needed to live - why so pensioners get less than the suns deemed needed to live? |
|
|
|
Post by ravey123 on Sept 10, 2024 17:24:02 GMT
Labour has not taken £300 off old people. It has changed the eligibility for a state benefit. Nobody has had money taken away. You are not at all arguing your reasons why you think all old people, regardless as to whether or not they may be a millionaire, should receive state benefits purely because of their age. I think you have really lost the plot with that first sentence. There are millions of pensioners who don't need the winter fuel supplement, but there are millions who do. There are millions of pensioners who have served their country, paid their taxes and now because they are old, they stay in more, cannot venture into the cold air or risk slipping on ice, need to keep their bodies warmer than young people, are unable to take exercise, and have less natural insulation in terms of body fat layer or hair. Many may have more income than the minimum level for supplementary support, but live in draughty, low insulated properties and have old inefficient heaters. There is no reasonable method of determining whether one old person needs the extra payment or not, everyone has different circumstances and needs, it is not purely a question of their income. There are many who qualify but don't apply for supplementary income because of something the young generation don't understand - pride. I remember my old Dad proudly claiming, he had never owed a penny to anyone. It wasn't literally true but there are many old people who will not ask for help or what they consider "charity". They expect to be treated properly without having to ask. I think the government have made a serious error of judgement on this issue. It is probably as big an error as Thatcher's error on pushing for a poll tax. Labour MPs are going to get hounded to death by their constituents for years to come, and it should be remembered they are only in power because the Tories messed up and lost support to third parties like LibDems, and the SNP also messed up, not because there was a groundswell of support for Labour. I don't think this topic is going to go away and even if the government suddenly find some cash down the back of the sofa and do a U turn, people will remember how they were treated, or, how their mum and dad were treated. Rant over. Perfectly put Mr Coke |
|
|
|
Post by lawrieleslie on Sept 10, 2024 17:35:09 GMT
But they have had the money taken away and here’s why….many pensioners on a shoestring budget will have factored in the £200 or £300 allowance for this winter but now it’s been taken away they will have to meet the shortfall some other way and that is very wrong and even cruel. If the benefit was to be cut then it should have been phased in next year to give pensioners a chance to adjust their budgets over a greater period and not the 4 months that Reeves has done. It would also have given the government the opportunity to means test the WFA more fairly and considerately. I agree that they could have phased it out or reviewed a way of administering it at a higher income threshold cut off. But nobody has had money taken from them. It would be very different had the benefit been paid and was being clawed back, which is not happening. I suspect most who are in desperate need are getting it still. Disagree. Because many pensioners on a tight budget & knowing about the looming energy price cap increase, will have had to budget in the WFA. As I said, now it’s been taken away they will have to find the shortfall elsewhere. You’re right it hasn’t been given then taken away but effectively this is what has happened. |
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Sept 10, 2024 17:35:39 GMT
Perhaps the pensioner should just keep the heating on, not die, and use the additional cash they are getting with the state pension increases to cover it (and have change leftover). Or the families can put their hands in their pockets if they really are that concerned. I would if I was concerned about an elderly relative because of this. Remember, the budget hasn’t yet been announced so I don’t think people need to be too dramatic quite yet. Forgive me but i thought the state pension increase was to cover rising living costs - cant have it both ways. What if the family cant afford to pay? The most disgusting thing about this that Labour always planned to do this but didnt have the minerals to put it in their manifesto. As others have said - if this was the Tories there would have been hell up. I suppose we’ll gave to see how they mitigate it at the budget. Wouldn’t it just be easier to make the pension the same value as the living wage - by definition the living wage is what is needed to live - why so pensioners get less than the suns deemed needed to live? State pensions rise in accordance with the triple lock. Disability benefits don’t. Nor do carer’s benefits. The state pension rises more than anything else, but is paid for by workers now. Not by the people directly benefiting from it now. I guess finding out the tories lied to everyone and cooked the books so that the manifestos were written based on false assumptions has nothing to do with policy change? It would be easier to do away with all benefits and state payments and have universal income. It has worked brilliantly in Finland. Tweak it so the rich (judged on capital and income) get nothing. It hasn’t disincentivised working in Finland at all. |
|
|
|
Post by iancransonsknees on Sept 10, 2024 17:44:25 GMT
I think you have really lost the plot with that first sentence. There are millions of pensioners who don't need the winter fuel supplement, but there are millions who do. There are millions of pensioners who have served their country, paid their taxes and now because they are old, they stay in more, cannot venture into the cold air or risk slipping on ice, need to keep their bodies warmer than young people, are unable to take exercise, and have less natural insulation in terms of body fat layer or hair. Many may have more income than the minimum level for supplementary support, but live in draughty, low insulated properties and have old inefficient heaters. There is no reasonable method of determining whether one old person needs the extra payment or not, everyone has different circumstances and needs, it is not purely a question of their income. There are many who qualify but don't apply for supplementary income because of something the young generation don't understand - pride. I remember my old Dad proudly claiming, he had never owed a penny to anyone. It wasn't literally true but there are many old people who will not ask for help or what they consider "charity". They expect to be treated properly without having to ask. I think the government have made a serious error of judgement on this issue. It is probably as big an error as Thatcher's error on pushing for a poll tax. Labour MPs are going to get hounded to death by their constituents for years to come, and it should be remembered they are only in power because the Tories messed up and lost support to third parties like LibDems, and the SNP also messed up, not because there was a groundswell of support for Labour. I don't think this topic is going to go away and even if the government suddenly find some cash down the back of the sofa and do a U turn, people will remember how they were treated, or, how their mum and dad were treated. Rant over. Perfectly put Mr Coke Can't believe Oggy's wanking off over the possibility of up to 4000 fuel poor pensioners dying as a result of the impact of excess cold this winter. Shocking. |
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Sept 10, 2024 17:48:21 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Sept 10, 2024 17:51:01 GMT
Can't believe Oggy's wanking off over the possibility of up to 4000 fuel poor pensioners dying as a result of the impact of excess cold this winter. Shocking. It would help if you would read my posts. I don’t think any of the wealthy pensioners (the majority) who have rightly had this free money taken away will suffer at all. As I have said repeatedly, the threshold for receiving the benefit should be higher than it is. Perhaps those above £20k income should miss out on it. That would be my preference. |
|
|
|
Post by thehartshillbadger on Sept 10, 2024 17:54:45 GMT
Can't believe Oggy's wanking off over the possibility of up to 4000 fuel poor pensioners dying as a result of the impact of excess cold this winter. Shocking. It would help if you would read my posts. I don’t think any of the wealthy pensioners (the majority) who have rightly had this free money taken away will suffer at all. As I have said repeatedly, the threshold for receiving the benefit should be higher than it is. Perhaps those above £20k income should miss out on it. That would be my preference. I agree with Cranny on this one. Your distain for grannies is deplorable |
|
|
|
Post by mickeythemaestro on Sept 10, 2024 17:57:42 GMT
It would help if you would read my posts. I don’t think any of the wealthy pensioners (the majority) who have rightly had this free money taken away will suffer at all. As I have said repeatedly, the threshold for receiving the benefit should be higher than it is. Perhaps those above £20k income should miss out on it. That would be my preference. I agree with Cranny on this one. Your distain for grannies is deplorable Wayne Rooney isn't impressed either the little monkey 😂 |
|
