Farage commits to reinstating winter fuel payment
Reform UK has said it will fully reinstate winter fuel payments to pensioners and scrap the two-child benefit cap, if the party gets into government.
The commitments - to be unveiled at a press conference next week - come after Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer faced pressure from Labour MPs to change his approach to both policies.
By the time of the next general election there may be no need to reverse either policy.
Sir Keir has already announced plans to ease cuts to winter fuel payments - without saying when or how.
And ministers say he has privately indicated he would like if possible to find a way to scrap the two-child benefit cap - although a formal decision may be many months away.
The intervention by Nigel Farage - first reported in the Sunday Telegraph - will highlight and magnify the increasingly awkward divisions over policy within Labour.
Reform UK said they would pay for their new polices by cutting net zero projects and scrapping hotels for asylum seekers.
A source told the paper it was "already outflanking Labour" on both issues.
Downing Street has been contacted for comment.
More than 10 million pensioners lost out on winter fuel payments, worth up to £300, when the pension top-up became restricted to only people receiving pension credit last year.
But Sir Keir has announced plans to ease the cuts in a U-turn following mounting political pressure in recent weeks.
The prime minster said the policy would be changed at the autumn Budget, adding ministers would only "make decisions we can afford". He did not lay out exactly what this would entail.
The winter fuel payment is a lump sum of £200 a year for households with a pensioner under 80, or £300 for households with a pensioner over 80.
Reform UK prepares for real power on council
Winter fuel U-turn seeks to calm Labour nerves
How much is the winter fuel payment?
Jittery Labour MPs divided over benefits cuts
On the two-child benefit cap, the Observer reported Sir Keir had privately backed plans to scrap it.
The paper's report that the PM was asking the Treasury to find ways to pay for it came alongside growing unrest and threats of rebellion among backbench Labour MPs.
The policy - which prevents most families from claiming means-tested benefits for any third or additional children born after April 2017 - was introduced in 2017 by the then-Conservative government and is estimated to affect 1.5 million families.
But the government's child poverty strategy, which had been due for publication in the spring, has been delayed as it is still being worked on and measures including scrapping the cap are being considered.
Labour MPs have long been calling for it to be axed, with seven of them suspended from the parliamentary party for voting against the government on an amendment to do so.
Four were readmitted in February but the remainder continue to sit as independent MPs.
Pressure to remove the limit has remained on the government from senior Labour figures, including former Prime Minister Gordon Brown, who said it was "condemning children to poverty".
Starmer announces U-turn on winter fuel payment cuts
UK child poverty numbers reach a record high
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
19 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Senedd members tackle ‘existential crisis' for democracy
Senedd members called for urgent action to tackle the "existential crisis" of abuse, harassment and intimidation faced by politicians on social media. Plaid Cymru's Adam Price, the first out-gay man in his party to be elected to national office, warned prejudices based on sex, race and sexual orientation have been reinvigorated. He told the Senedd: "It is getting worse by the day, and it really represents an existential crisis for our democracy and our society." Mr Price said: "For our democracy to be effective, it has to be diverse. "Diversity trumps ability. "It's a piece of evidence in social science." The former Plaid Cymru leader called for a focus on representation of trans women and men, a community "under siege," to ensure their voices are heard in the Senedd. Mr Price highlighted harmful comments below news stories involving him in recent weeks. "That certainly won't deter me and I hope it won't deter anyone else," he said. "But we've got to do something about it collectively, haven't we?" Labour's Hannah Blythyn expressed concerns that Wales could go backwards in terms of equality of representation at the next Senedd election. Ms Blythyn told Senedd members: "I very much made an active decision when I had the opportunity to stand in this legislature because of the make-up – that there were more women here, that it was more representative." Jane Hutt, Wales' social justice secretary, acknowledged the rise of abuse, harassment and intimidation towards politicians, candidates and campaigners. She outlined voluntary diversity and inclusion guidance for political parties which aims to ensure democratic bodies are truly representative of all the people of Wales. Ms Hutt said safety costs will be exempt from spending limits for Welsh elections. Conservative Altaf Hussain warned guidance on equal representation risks crossing a dangerous line. He said: "Equality of access cannot come just by bureaucratic diktats or targets." Plaid Cymru's Sioned Williams said progress on underrepresentation of women in politics has slowed, warning the voluntary guidance was published "far too late." "Wales belongs to everyone," she said. "Everyone must have a voice in our nation's future."
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Lammy is picking a needless fight with America
The alarming revelation that 2024 recorded the highest number of global conflicts since the Second World War should be taken as an incentive to deepen ties with key allies, not fracture them. That would certainly be the response of any government committed to the defence of the realm faced with the depressing statistic that last year saw 61 conflicts taking place in 36 countries. Of these, 11 were defined as full-blown conflicts – those that claimed at least 1,000 battlefield deaths – and included the ongoing wars in Ukraine and Gaza, as well as other less-publicised violent eruptions in Sudan, Syria, Nigeria and Ethiopia. At a time when Sir Keir Starmer is attempting to promote his national security credentials, the rising tide of conflict detailed in a report by Sweden's Uppsala University should prompt his Government to strengthen ties with key allies such as the US and Israel. Instead, by opting to target two members of the Israeli government with sanctions, Starmer has shown that he is more interested in virtue-signalling than common sense. National security minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and finance minister Bezalel Smotrich may come from the ulta-nationalist fringe of Israeli politics, but they remain important members of Israel's democratically elected government, which is one of the UK's closest allies in the Middle East. Moreover, Israel, just like Ukraine, finds itself in the vanguard of the West's deepening confrontation with two of the most potent threats it faces, in the form of Vladimir Putin's Russia and Iranian-sponsored Islamist terrorism. The UK's support for Ukraine, together with its European allies, is predicated on the understanding that Western security would be fatally compromised if Russia's unprovoked invasion of Ukraine were to succeed. Similarly, the UK's declaration of support for Israel in the wake of the October 7 attacks in 2023 was based on the tacit acknowledgement that it was in the West's interests that Iran's backing for Hamas terrorists must not be allowed to go unchallenged, especially given the ayatollahs' fixation with developing nuclear weapons. The Labour Government's decision, therefore, to single out two prominent members of the Israeli government for public censure not only threatens to undermine relations with a key regional ally. It runs the risk of jeopardising our own national security, especially if the Israelis conclude it is no longer in their interests to share vital intelligence with the UK. Israeli foreign minister Gideon Saar has already announced the Israeli cabinet will meet next week to respond to what he called an 'unacceptable decision'. The British Government's decision to pick on the two politicians is hardly surprising given its previous lamentable track record of targeting Israel, with Foreign Secretary David Lammy declaring his support for the International Criminal Court and its highly politicised move to prosecute Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu for war crimes. Yet, by siding with other self-righteous, but wholly naive, administrations in Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Norway, to provoke an entirely avoidable diplomatic row with Israel, Starmer and Co have placed themselves firmly on the wrong side of history. Apart from alienating Israel, the move also risks causing a rift with the US, another key ally. America's secretary of state Marco Rubio was particularly critical of the measures imposed against Ben-Gvir and Smotrich for 'inciting violence against the Palestinian people'. The sanctions 'do not advance US-led efforts to achieve a ceasefire, bring all hostages home and end the war,' he said, urging the UK 'not to forget who the real enemy is'. Hitting two controversial Israeli politicians with sanctions might play to Labour's vociferously anti-Israel supporters, but it could prove to be a self-defeating move in terms of safeguarding our own long-term interests. In terms of the likely impact it will have on Israeli policy, the sanctions will be about as effective as Greta Thunberg's equally puerile attempt this week to break Israel's Gaza blockade with her Freedom Flotilla. At the same time they run the risk of sending a signal to Iran and other hostile regimes that the UK is more interested in embarrassing its allies than confronting its enemies. It is certainly hard to grasp the logic of why, when Western powers like the UK are preparing to confront Iran over its nuclear programme, they should choose this moment to pick a fight with Israel, Tehran's sworn enemy. The need to impose fresh sanctions against Iran was very much in evidence at this week's meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna, when Rafael Grossi, the body's director general, confirmed three new previously undeclared nuclear sites had been identified in Iran that could be used for developing nuclear weapons. The UK is among a number of European powers that have responded by pressing for the reimposition of sanctions against Tehran. But the ayatollahs are unlikely to change course on their nuclear ambitions if they believe they share a common interest with Britain and its allies in targeting the Israelis. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Rachel Reeves may have just killed Nato
There will be a moment, some time in the next few years when the US will genuinely consider leaving Nato. And if it does, we should not be surprised. It wasn't as if they didn't warn the rest of us. About the only thing Donald Trump and Barack Obama ever agreed on was that Europe must make a much bigger financial contribution to Nato. In 2014 at the Cardiff Summit, the Treasury furiously resisted the demands. All sorts of tricks were pulled and definitions were stretched to get the UK to 2 per cent of GDP. The Americans, in their polite way, asked nicely. They've been asking ever since. Because as they command all Allied forces in Nato they knew the truth about the state of everyone's forces. While public scrutiny was kept at bay using secrecy and 'operational reasons', SACEUR – Supreme Allied Commander Europe, the military boss of Nato and always an American – grew increasingly concerned as Russia got more and more aggressive. And still European capitals, including London, carried on cutting. Not until 2019 and Boris Johnson did the Ministry of Defence turn the corner with real money and real reform. Previous Conservative and Labour governments had used the Red Arrows and Trooping the Colour to pretend that all was well. But Ukraine found us out. Nato and the international community needed to act: and as we examined our inventory ministers could see just how weak we had become. I remember when we debated gifting the AS90 155mm long range artillery to Ukraine I was informed that while we had 73 guns on the books only 19 worked! Or when I tried to increase the number of tanks to be upgraded to Challenger 3s I was told it was impossible because so many of our tanks had already been stripped of parts to keep others running. You might say that I should have known all that detail on day one. But you'd be surprised how well the services can hide bad news when they want to. Last week we witnessed Labour's first defence review for more than 20 years. It was heralded by re‑announcing many Conservative procurements. As a review it was weak: clearly budget-led not threat led. The big decisions had been made beforehand, and without 3 per cent by 2030 the review would clearly be hollow at birth, as it was. It was also an insult to the men and women of the Armed Forces and the equivalent of sticking two fingers up to the White House. Today's spending review confirmed what we all feared. Rather than making tough decisions on public spending priorities, Rachel Reeves chose to use Treasury tricks to deceive us all. The Government has folded in intelligence spending, Ukraine spending and even Foreign Office money to the notional 'defence' figure. The result is that core defence spending will not even be 2.5 per cent as promised: not even close. There was no path to 3 per cent either. It was just a con all along. If John Healey spent as much time battling the Treasury as he did repeating my government's plans or deceiving the public with spin then he might have had some success. But it is clear he is Labour first and UK defence second. How dare this Government avoid the solemn duty to defend our shores and properly equip the men and women of the armed forces. Labour was the government that sent our troops to war in Snatch Land Rovers and they are destined to repeat that betrayal. Next week Donald Trump will arrive in Holland for the Nato summit. He will bring with him a message that we must all spend 3.5 per cent of GDP on actual defence, not counting spies or diplomats. The Donald will not be bought off with Treasury tricks. I was in Washington last week and some very senior people in the White House and the Pentagon genuinely believe Trump may leave Nato in two years. They are serious. So we need to either demonstrate we are pulling our weight or we need to compensate for the 70 per cent loss to Nato capability if the US leaves. Based on Rachel Reeves's efforts we will do neither. History may point to this as the moment when the UK surrendered its place in Nato and triggered its demise. And all the while, Putin and Xi will be licking their lips. Waiting for their moment. For that little bit of Estonia or Finland. The best Donald Trump can do next week is say that Nato is a club with a subscription. No money should mean no entry. Ben Wallace served as Secretary of State for Defence from 2019 to 2023. He is a former British Army officer Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
