RACHEL Reeves has warned Labour MPs there will be more difficult cuts to come as she pleaded with them not to rebel against her ending the universal Winter Fuel Payment.
The Chancellor met with her party’s MPs in Westminster on Monday evening, ahead of a crunch vote on the issue in the Commons on Tuesday. The BBC reported that all Scottish Labour MPs will back Reeves, ignoring calls to take a stand from SNP Westminster leader Stephen Flynn.
Reeves – who was arguing for the Winter Fuel Payment to be cut back as long as a decade ago – has repeatedly claimed her decision to do so was forced by the economic legacy left by the Tories.
READ MORE: Labour have 'done nothing less than cut UK pensions', policy expert says
She hammered this point home on Monday as she spoke to her party’s MPs, in a speech which Westminster media reported went down well with her Labour colleagues.
In comments released publicly, Reeves said she was “not immune” to concerns over plans to dramatically scale back the payment.
“I understand the decision that this Government have made on winter fuel is a difficult decision,” she said. “I’m not immune to the arguments that many in this room have made. We considered those when the decision was made.”
However, Reeves argued that the rise by £900 of the new state pension compared to a year ago means that pensioners have £900 pounds more in their pockets this year.
“Tomorrow, we get data for earnings growth, which will inform the increase in the pension next year. We are protecting the triple lock, not just for this year, but for the duration of this Parliament,” she said.
However, Reeves warned Labour MPs there would be “more difficult decisions to come”, raising the spectre of further cuts – on top of the billions in savings she has already asked Government departments to make.
Reeves said: “I don’t say that because I relish it. I don’t, but it is a reflection of the inheritance that we face.
“So, when members are looking at where to apportion blame, when pensioners are looking where to apportion blame, I tell you where the blame lies.
“It lies with the Conservatives and the reckless decisions that they made.”
READ MORE: Jonathon Shafi: We need leadership willing to challenge austerity agenda
Some 10 million pensioners across the UK will not receive the Winter Fuel Payment if the vote to make it means-tested passes Westminster.
However, former prime minister David Cameron has criticised the UK Government’s “misguided attack” on the Winter Fuel Payments and argued it should rethink to save “the shame and embarrassment”.
The Conservative peer suggested the eligibility criteria for receiving the allowance should be raised using the tax system to exclude more wealthy pensioners, an idea which has also been floated by policy experts.
Speaking in the House of Lords, Cameron said: “As someone who made a promise to Britain’s pensioners to keep the winter fuel payment, and kept that for six years as prime minister, may I make a gentle suggestion to the Government?
“Instead of this misguided attack on the winter fuel payment, why not simply say that pensioners who are higher-rate or additional-rate taxpayers do not receive it?
“You may only raise 10% of the money but you would save 90% of the shame and embarrassment of the current position.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel