
Pensioners need a Summer Cool Payment
The Winter Fuel Payment is a tax-free £200 that has been given to all pensioners each winter since 1997. Winter Fuel has a nice ring to it; it suggests a puffing, red-cheeked septuagenarian carrying an armful of logs through the snow, and some bureaucratic Wenceslas stopping to cheer them along with a nice little cheque. It is a benefit some pensioners do sincerely need. But millions of other recipients don't need it, and in a country that is forecast to spend £175bn on pensioners' benefits this year (compared to, for example, £5bn in benefits for children), there is an argument that it might not be the best use of the country's funds. But when the government tried to remove it from all but the poorest pensioners, it met with furious opprobrium from the wood-burning classes and was forced into a U-turn that will cost £1.25 billion a year. Labour's own backbenchers insisted the payment was necessary, having been horrified by the effect that means-testing the payment had on their party's performance in the local elections.
But now it's hotter than some parts of Australia, probably, and this suggests a policy idea: having decided that the nation's pensioners – more than three million of whom live in a household with assets over £1,000,000 – really do need an extra £200 in the winter, those who argued for a universal Winter Fuel Payment should now consider whether a summer air-conditioning subsidy is also needed.
After all, hot weather is effectively a wealth tax. The employed may spend their days in air-conditioned offices (or the sea, if they're a marine biologist). Where do retirees go when it's baking, and they're not on holiday? Sainsbury's or Waitrose, of course – both are Baltic at this time of year. But the extra time one spends gliding their deliciously cool aisles adds up to a lot more shopping. At home, Victorian houses are notoriously poorly insulated, and the garden must be hosed daily. The cheapest Dyson fan is £250. Fever-Tree is £2.25 a bottle. Why isn't the triple lock taking all these extra expenses into account?
It's not much to ask. Pensioners who have paid their way through society, or feel that they have, are surely entitled to a Summer Cool Payment of £200 per household, or £400 if they have to use the Central Line. Just £200 could pay for a month's supply of Evian facial spray, a pair of linen trousers and one of those neck fans that looks like a big pair of headphones.
And it's not like the increasingly extreme weather caused by climate change is in any way the fault of today's retirees, is it?
[See also: In defence of Lord Hermer]
Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe
Related
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Guardian
44 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Angela Rayner on lessons learned from Labour's first year
Pippa Crerar and Kiran Stacey speak to Angela Rayner about Labour's first year in government and the challenges ahead. The deputy prime minister reveals the issue that keeps her awake at night, reflects on why voters are frustrated with Labour, what she thinks the party can do about it, and how it's planning to take the fight to Reform

The National
an hour ago
- The National
It's hard to see new left party cutting through in Scotland
The first thing to say is that if it is able to break out of the factions and abbreviations which abound in the terrain to the left of Labour – and with 300,000 claimed sign-ups and a poll rating of 10% it just might – then it marks a very big change in socialist thinking. For more than a century, socialists who wanted to change capitalism have rubbed along in the Labour Party with those who just wanted a bit more from it. Now large sections of the Labour left look set to give up the ghost. For me, that ship sailed long ago. It's more than two decades since I became convinced that using the powers that Scotland would get with political independence offered a much better prospect of changing the world than trying to reform a British state run by people still steeped in the mindset of empire. READ MORE: Man arrested for 'carrying a placard calling Donald Trump an offensive word' Nonetheless it's an important debate. The political character of England should matter greatly to Scotland and this new party might even play a role here. In one sense the Labour left has nowhere to go. Those now in control of the party have made it perfectly clear radical views are no longer welcome within it. They have been demonised and purged. Labour is manifesting every bit as much intolerance and authoritarianism in its internal structures as it does in government. But how did it come to this? A short time ago the Labour left had more power than at any point in the party's history. Corbyn was leader and commanded the considerable resources provided to the parliamentary opposition by the state. The left controlled the conference and the NEC. And the mobilisation of the grassroots through Momentum was impressive in its day. Yet within a few short years it had all evaporated. Corbyn and others left or were expelled, policy was abandoned wholesale, and the Labour conference would sing the national anthem with no visible dissent. It has been a remarkable transition both in speed and scale. In part this is because the Corbyn project failed abjectly (Image: Getty) in its own terms. Jeremy became leader by accident. And he wasn't very good at it. I watched for years in the House of Commons the breathtaking disloyalty of the right-wing Labour parliamentarians towards the Corbyn front bench. It was embarrassing. Never have I seen such hostility and hate between political parties, never mind within one. But no-one got suspended, or expelled or deselected. They were ignored, left alone to operate as a party within a party. Despite his strength in the wider party organisation, Corbyn never moved against his enemy within. Too naïve, or too nice. Either way, a fatal mistake. Corbyn also never got out of his silo, unwilling or incapable of moving beyond his natural support. He should have developed a narrative about Brexit or constitutional reform that would have galvanised a wider alliance which the left could lead. He didn't. Once defeated, his opponents lost no time in eradicating any possible legacy. These right-wing parliamentarians had been busy making plans. There were organised by a ruthless and clever Irishman called Morgan McSweeney under the banner Labour Together. McSweeney built a strategy for power inspired by Odysseus. Seeing the popularity of left policies in the party, and among the electorate, he argued for 'Corbynism without Corbyn'. But he needed someone to front it who couldn't immediately be outed as a right-wing hack. Step forward the hapless Keir Starmer. You'll cringe to look now at the ten-point platform McSweeney drew up for Starmer's leadership bid. Common ownership, higher income tax on top earners, improving welfare, and more. It worked at the time. Those Labour members who hadn't left after their leader fell lapped it up. Once in position, McSweeney and his acolytes didn't show any hesitation that might have come from wanting to be nice or fair. At breakneck speed and with ruthless efficiency they brushed aside anyone in their way, including many on the soft left, which they saw as a gateway for extremists. They won through deceit, but at the price of the party itself. Which is why we've got a new one. So, what does this mean for us? We've just got used to Scotland being a plurality in which six parties compete. Are we now to have seven? It's hard to see. Certainly, there's plenty of discontent within Labour ranks, but not nearly as much as in places like London. Besides, there's already plenty of options where the disenchanted could escape to. And across it all lies the independence question. Not really something you can avoid. Is it plausible, or possible, for a new party to say we're really radical and want a complete overhaul of the system, but we are agnostic on whether Scotland should be an independent country or remain in the UK? Especially when they would, by definition, be living proof of the failure of the latter option.

The National
an hour ago
- The National
John Swinney hints at rescue package to save Alexander Dennis jobs
The Scottish Government has today confirmed it is looking at a rescue package it thinks could save jobs at Alexander Dennis – but said details were being kept under wraps due to 'commercial sensitivity'. The firm has threatened to end its manufacturing operations in Scotland by closing its sites in Larbert and Falkirk, putting 400 jobs on the line. It is planning to centralise its operations in Scarborough, North Yorkshire. In a statement, Swinney indicated that a package of new work to keep jobs in Scotland was being explored. READ MORE: Protesters to slam SNP's £180,000 cash award to Donald Trump golf course He said: 'Scottish Ministers place the utmost importance on the presence of Alexander Dennis in Scotland and the retention of its highly skilled manufacturing workers. 'The Scottish Government has committed to exploring any and all viable options throughout the consultation period to allow the firm to retain its skilled employees and manufacturing and production facilities. 'While I cannot provide details due to commercial sensitivity at this time, I hope this update provides the workforce and local community with further assurance that the Scottish Government remains wholly committed to supporting the future of bus manufacturing in Scotland. 'We will undertake this work in tandem with every other short, medium and long-term opportunity we continue to explore in close collaboration with the company, Unite, GMB, Scottish Enterprise, Transport Scotland and the UK Government.' Deputy First Minister Kate Forbes is meeting unions GMB and Unite to discuss the proposal while [[Transport]] Secretary Fiona Hyslop attends a meeting of the UK Bus Manufacturing Expert Panel in London focusing on the future pipeline of zero-emission bus orders. READ MORE: Trans toilet rules 'may force Scottish museums to close' It was reported earlier this month that a consultation with the workforce on job losses would be extended for another fortnight to explore ways of keeping jobs in Scotland. There have also been proposals to put staff on a furlough scheme to retain jobs in Scotland before work on new orders came in. Unite's regional secretary for Scotland Derek Thomson previously told a Holyrood committee that the closure of Alexander Dennis's Scottish operations would be "catastrophic" for the local area. The threat of closure has already spilled into the Scottish economy, with Greenfold Systems Ltd, based in Dunfermline, Fife, closing because a major proportion of its operations were involved with the troubled bus firm. A total of 81 jobs were lost after the "loss of a major contract", administrators said. The threatened closure has become a major political issue, with Scottish Labour accusing the SNP of failing to do enough to support the firm. Anas Sarwar has repeatedly criticised John Swinney of having done "nothing" to save jobs, pointing out that the [[SNP]] were ordering "buses from China, instead of from Scotland". But it later emerged that in Labour-run Edinburgh, where the buses are municipally owned by the council, had not bought buses from Alexander Dennis in the last three years.