Labour hopes to put winter fuel misstep behind them
The final act in this slow motion U-turn has played out.
The arc of this row runs to almost a year. It was late July last year when I was among a bunch of reporters called into the Treasury to question the then new chancellor about her out-of-the-blue policy to take the Winter Fuel Payment from millions of pensioners.
Rachel Reeves limited the payment to only those pensioners in receipt of pension credit or other means-tested benefits – around 1.5 million – saving up to £1.5bn a year.
Ever since Labour MPs have grumbled they've been taking heat for it.
Two-and-a-half weeks ago, the prime minister said the threshold would be moving.
Last week, the chancellor said the new recipients would get it this coming winter.
We now know who will qualify and who will have to pay it back.
A couple of thoughts: could the government have done this in the first place?
Some privately say: absolutely.
Others say there was genuinely real concern in the Treasury about the state of the books and they felt compelled to do something to reduce so-called in year costs.
Winter fuel payment U-turn in place this year, says chancellor
PM accepts need for clarity on winter fuel payments
Millionaires shouldn't get winter fuel cash, minister says
Secondly: once they decided to move, they have moved pretty quickly, albeit announcing the U-turn in iterative steps, one week after another.
We are not being kept waiting until the Budget in the autumn, or even the Spending Review on Wednesday - here we have it, the new threshold.
So, how will the government pay for it? It is projected to cost £1.25bn.
Ministers say there won't be a "permanent" increase in borrowing.
So how much borrowing will there be, and for how long? And which other budgets may be squeezed as a result?
For many within Labour this whole debacle was the single biggest misstep of the party's first year in office.
They will now hope to put it behind them.
But it's one of those things forever likely to remain in the biography of this government - with questions asked of Rachel Reeves about it.
Sign up for our Politics Essential newsletter to read top political analysis, gain insight from across the UK and stay up to speed with the big moments. It'll be delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
20 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Spending review now settled, says Downing Street
The government's latest spending plans are settled, the prime minister's official spokesman has said. Chancellor Rachel Reeves is expected to expected to announce funding increases for the NHS, schools and defence, along with a number of infrastructure projects, when she sets out her day-to-say spending and investment plans for each department in Wednesday's Spending Review. Home Secretary Yvette Cooper was the last to fix a deal on Monday afternoon, following public warnings from police chiefs, calling for more money. Housing Secretary Angela Rayner reached a deal with Reeves and the Treasury on Sunday evening. Reeves has loosened Treasury borrowing rules to free up about £113bn for investment in infrastructure projects, but will need to squeeze budgets elsewhere in order meet her own rules, which include not borrowing to fund day-to-day spending. Last week, she admitted that she had been forced to turn down requests for funding for projects she would have wanted to back. Ministers seeking to protect their budgets remained locked in budget talks over the weekend. Announcing ministerial negotiations over the government's spending review had been completed, the prime minister's official spokesman said the chancellor would be investing in public services and growth. "The spending review is settled - we will be focused on investing in Britain's renewal so that all working people are better off," he said. "The first job of the government was to stabilise the British economy and the public finances, and now we move into a new chapter to deliver the promise and change." The Home Office had argued privately that police numbers must be maintained for the government to deliver its policy commitments on neighbourhood policing, but that under the spending proposals this would not be possible. Police chiefs including Sir Mark Rowley, the commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, had publicly lobbyied the government for more money in recent weeks, and there were suggestions the Treasury might have "imposed" a settlement on the Home Office. Over the weekend, Technology Secretary Peter Kyle told the BBC's Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg the chancellor was facing pressure from all departments for additional funding. Kyle said "every part of society was struggling" and declined to rule out a squeeze on policing. The last-minute talks with Cooper come ahead of what is set to be a highly significant week for every part of government. Reeves has already U-turned on removing Winter Fuel payments from all but the poorest pensioners, and will now give these 75% of pensioners, which will cost an estimated £1.25bn. The government has also pledged to hike defence spending, invest £86bn in science and technology, and give free school meals to half a million more children. To balance the spending, Reeves has announced a £14bn package of savings in March, including £4.8bn of welfare cuts. However, opponents have accused the government of having the wrong priorities. Conservative shadow home secretary Chris Philp said: "They have chosen to prioritise spending on Ed Miliband's mad green projects, on inflation-busting pay rises for their trade union paymasters and spending £100bn a year – five times the police budget – on debt interest payments." Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey has urged the chancellor to rule out cuts to social care, which is financed through local councils. He said the government would have "more money in the pot, more growth, more revenue" if it pursued closer trading ties with Europe. Home secretary yet to agree deal days before spending review Spending Review: Massive cheques from the chancellor for some - but what do totals hide? Sign up for our Politics Essential newsletter to read top political analysis, gain insight from across the UK and stay up to speed with the big moments. It'll be delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Yahoo
20 minutes ago
- Yahoo
California Gov. Gavin Newsom is floating a federal tax boycott
As tensions escalate between California and the Trump administration over immigration, another potential battlefront is emerging over taxes. The spat began with reports that the Trump administration is considering cutting funding for California's university system, the largest higher education system in the nation with about 12% of all U.S. enrolled students. In response, Gov. Gavin Newsom wrote Friday afternoon in a social media post that California provides about $80 billion more in taxes to the federal government than it receives in return. "Maybe it's time to cut that off, @realDonaldTrump," Newsom said. What is a donor state? A donor state is one that provides more in taxes to the federal government than they receive in return. The largest one, by far, is California, according to tax data. In 2022, California's residents and businesses provided $692 billion in tax revenue to the federal government. In return, the state received $609 billion in federal funding, leaving a gap of about $83 billion, according to the California Budget and Policy Center, a nonpartisan think tank. See which states are the biggest donors California's gap is so large partly due to the large number of high-income residents in the state, who pay a larger share of their income toward federal taxes than lower-income workers, the California Budget and Policy Center says. !function(){"use strict"; 0!== e= t in r,i=0;r=e[i];i++)if( d= Overall, 11 U.S. states contribute more in taxes to the federal government than they get back, according to the Rockefeller Institute of Government: California ($83 billion gap)New Jersey ($28.9 billion)Massachusetts ($27 billion)Washington state ($17.8 billion)New York ($7.1 billion)Minnesota ($4.5 billion)Colorada ($2.9 billion)Illinois ($2.6 billion)New Hampshire ($2.4 billion)Connecticut ($1.9 billion)Utah ($709 million) Other states receive more in funding than they provide to the federal government, according to the tax data. The imbalance stems from a mix of reasons, ranging from some states having a larger share of residents on federal aid programs, such as Medicaid, to a larger number of federal facilities, such as military bases, compared with other states, according to the California Budget and Policy Center. What has the Trump administration said? In response to Newsom's post about boycotting federal tax payments, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent warned in a Sunday social media post that the governor "is threatening to commit criminal tax evasion." "His plan: defraud the American taxpayer and leave California residents on the hook for unpaid federal taxes," Bessent wrote. Bessent added, "Instead of committing criminal tax evasion, Governor Newsom should consider a tax plan for California that follows the Trump Tax Cuts model and reduces the onerous state tax burden to allow families to keep more of their hard-earned money." Kristi Noem says "we are not going to let a repeat of 2020 happen" amid L.A. crackdown Magic in the dark: The fantastical worlds of Lightwire Theater Trump blasts Newsom as "grossly incompetent" as tensions rise over L.A. protests
Yahoo
25 minutes ago
- Yahoo
North East MPs react to Rachel Reeves' winter fuel payment announcement
North East MPs have welcomed the news nine million pensioners will receive a winter fuel payout again this year. The Chancellor announced a £1.25bn U-turn today (Monday, June 9) which will see the payment worth up to £300 restored for the vast majority of pensioners. It will mean all OAPs with an income of under £35,000 will automatically receive the amount, after the payment was initially scrapped last year for all but the worst-off pensioners. Confirming the U-turn, Rachel Reeves said the Government had 'listened to people's concerns' about the decision to limit the payment to the poorest pensioners last winter, and was now able to widen eligibility because Labour had restored 'stability' to the economy. Durham MP Mary Kelly Foy said: 'I'm delighted the Government has listened to the voices of those impacted by the loss of Winter Fuel Allowance, and to campaigners, charities and MPs who have been advocating for it be either be re-introduced, or for the cut off threshold to be extended to ensure more people are eligible. 'I made my opposition to these cuts clear at the time, and have continued to advocate for the Government to change course. It's good news more people will benefit from this payment this year, but the Government must ensure decisions made going forward protect vulnerable groups, rather than push them further into poverty. Ms Foy called for a U-turn on the Government's policy last year. Read next: Craig Yorke: Girls tell jury defendant had weapons in car before alleged murder Prosecco-launching booze thief who flung bottle at Tesco staff barred from Darlington Call for speed bumps on 'lethal' County Durham road after boy, 9, hit by car lick here to join our WhatsApp community and get breaking news updates direct to your phone. Luke Myer, MP for Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland, said: 'This is a positive and long-overdue step to support older people through the winter. "I'm pleased the Treasury have listened to me and other MPs who expressed concern about the threshold. 'Raising the threshold will help pensioners across Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland to stay warm and well. But we also need to see faster action to bring down bills in the long term and end the unfair postcode lottery for fuel poverty in our region.'
