Scottish Government refuses to rule out changes to pensioners' winter payment
The Scottish Government has not ruled out making changes to its equivalent on the winter fuel payment scheme, amid concerns some pensioners could be left worse off than their counterparts south of the border.
A spokesperson for First Minister John Swinney said ministers at Holyrood were 'trying to understand the fiscal implications' of Monday's policy change by the UK Government.
After cutting the winter fuel payment for all but the poorest pensioners last year, Chancellor Rachel Reeves has now confirmed some nine million pensioners in England and Wales will receive the benefit this winter.
The payment, worth up to £300, will be restored to the vast majority of pensioners who previously received it, with those with an income of under £35,000 a year qualifying for the UK Government's payment.
Today we are expanding Winter Fuel Payments to benefit nine million pensioners this winter.
It is right that we continue to means-test this payment so that it is targeted and fair.
That's why we have acted to expand eligibility so no pensioner on a lower income will miss out.
— Rachel Reeves (@RachelReevesMP) June 9, 2025
In Scotland, ministers had already announced plans to ensure all pensioner households receive a payment.
The Pension Age Winter Heating Payment will see all pensioner households get at least £100, with poorer pensioners getting either £200 or £300 depending on their age.
Labour, however, challenged SNP ministers to ensure that 'no struggling Scottish pensioners will be left out of pocket under their plans'.
Mr Swinney's spokesperson confirmed that, as it stands, the policy in Scotland has not been changed.
But adding that ministers are 'trying to understand the fiscal implications' of what has been announced', the spokesperson refused to rule out future changes to the payments.
'We will always seek to support pensioners in Scotland the best we can, we are absolutely committed to that,' the spokesperson said.
The change in policy from the UK Government will bring additional money for the Scottish Government – with the spokesperson stressing SNP ministers are 'still trying to understand' how much extra cash could be due.
Here, the spokesperson stressed the Scottish Government's budget is 'set largely by Westminster', adding: 'We have to, frankly, read the tea leaves sometimes about what is going to happen to our block grant throughout the year.'
The comments from the First Minister's spokesperson came as Scottish Social Justice Secretary Shirley-Anne Somerville described the UK Government's handling of of the benefit as 'shambolic'.
Ms Somerville welcomed Labour's U-turn on the benefit cut, but said the decision should never have happened in the first place.
She told BBC Radio Scotland it was 'very difficult to try and run a devolved social security system when you're actually finding out some of the details on social media before you can actually find out the details from the Government'.
The Social Justice Secretary insisted that was 'no way for the Governments to work together,', adding she was 'deeply disappointed in the way that the UK Government have handled this once again with the Scottish Government'.
Scottish Secretary Ian Murray stressed the benefit was devolved to Scotland, saying: 'This is a devolved payment. There's lots of social security that is devolved in Scotland. It is up to the Scottish Government to develop that and come up with their own policy.'
The Labour MP also told BBC Radio Scotland the Scottish Government's winter fuel payments system meant that 'limited public money' will go towards helping millionaire pensioners with their heating bills.
He insisted the initial decision by the UK Government to scrap the universal payments had been the 'right thing to do at the time', but added that changes could be made to this now the economy has been 'stabilised'.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Trump plans memorial to his mother on new Scottish golf course
Donald Trump is creating a memorial garden to his Scottish mother on the site of his new golf course in Aberdeenshire. The main feature of the garden will be a tribute carved in stone imported from Mary Anne Trump's birthplace, the Isle of Lewis in the Outer Hebrides. The announcement of Mr Trump's tribute to his mother came as Trump International Scotland unveiled the layout for a new course alongside the existing links course on his Menie estate. It is set to formally open this summer. Known officially as the Old and the New, the courses will combine to create what the company describes as ' the greatest 36 holes in golf' on the Aberdeenshire coast. The US president's mother was born Mary Anne MacLeod on Lewis, but emigrated to New York in 1930 when she was 18. She was one of tens of thousands of Scots who travelled to the US and Canada in the early years of the last century looking to escape economic hardship at home. She was hired as a domestic servant at the Carnegie Mansion on New York's Fifth Avenue and six years later married Frederick Trump, the successful property developer son of German migrants, and one of the most eligible men in New York. The US president was the fourth of the couple's five children. Mr Trump has spoken fondly of his mother, who died in 2000, aged 88. He said in an interview last year: 'The Scottish very great people, they're tough people. They're good fighters. [My mother] was funny, she had a great sense of humour.' Sarah Malone, the executive vice-president of Trump International, said: 'With the New course opening now fast approaching, we are delighted to share the final layout of this extraordinary links and the completion of The Greatest 36 Holes. 'It has been a phenomenal journey to create two truly exceptional world-class championship golf courses, across this magnificent stretch of North Sea coastline. 'The Trump family has a deep affection for Scotland, not only as the home of golf, but as the ancestral home of President Trump's beloved mother, Mary Anne MacLeod.' The plans for the second course were approved in 2019 alongside proposals for 550 new homes, shops, offices and restaurants. Planners received 2,921 valid representations from the public about the plan, 2,918 of which were objections and just 3 supported the Trump Organisation application. But despite the significant local opposition, Aberdeenshire council approved the £150 million plan. 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.
USA Today
an hour ago
- USA Today
How much is St. Andrews worth to the Scottish economy? The dollar figure is shocking
How much is St. Andrews worth to the Scottish economy? The dollar figure is shocking Visitors traveling to St. Andrews to play golf are worth the equivalent of hosting three Open Championships in Scotland every year, according to new research. The study by the Sport Industry Research Centre at Sheffield Hallam University found that visitors and their families who come to play the Old Course and six others managed by St. Andrews Links Trust generate about $430 million annually for the Scottish economy. This supports 4,300 full-time jobs across the country. Researchers calculated the amount visitors spent directly on golf in St. Andrews as well as on hotels, restaurants, bars, shops and local travel providers. St. Andrews Links - whose other courses include the New, Jubilee, Castle, Eden, Balgove and Strathtyrum courses - welcomes an average of 2,000 playing visitors every week. Around 72% of those visitors come from overseas, with the USA (40%) and Canada (6%) being the key markets. A further 28% of visits were from the UK, with the remaining 26% coming from elsewhere. Across visitors from all locations, 84% said they were 'likely or very likely' to return in the future. More: Golfweek's Best 2025: The top 50 classic courses in Great Britain and Ireland 'This is the first such study looking solely at the impact of golf in St. Andrews on the town and the wider Scottish economy," said Neil Coulson, chief executive of St. Andrews Links Trust. 'It clearly shows the massive impact on the town and that our visitors are delivering a boost to communities across Scotland each and every year. This impact has probably been undervalued in the past. 'The unique place that St. Andrews holds as the lifeblood and source of the sport means that both golfers and non-golfers want to come here and experience this place for themselves. But this only works if we continue to invest in our facilities and in ensuring we strive for excellence in customer experience.' St. Andrews Links Trust is a charity with all of its revenue reinvested into the sport, facilities and in community initiatives across the region. For every $1 that passes through the tills of St. Andrews Links from visitors, an additional $4.65 is generated for other businesses in the town. "Scotland has a proud reputation as the birthplace of the game and St. Andrews is home to many links courses, not least the Old Course, which are the envy of the world," Scottish Business Minister Richard Lochhead said. "This report hits home the scale of the benefits we all reap from the trust's courses, alongside the broader impact of golf tourism, which boosts the economy by £300 million every year and supports around 5,000 jobs. "I commend the Trust for all it does to sustain and grow the game and I'm looking forward to the return of The Open to St Andrews in 2027, which, backed by Scottish Government funding, will further increase our standing as a first-class host of major events." Of the 283,000 rounds played on the seven St. Andrews Links courses in 2023, 152,000 (54%) were played by visitors to St. Andrews. More than half of visitors combined their St. Andrews Links trip with a visit to another iconic layout in Scotland, the most popular being Kingsbarns (29%), Carnoustie (25%), Dumbarnie (15%) and Crail (14%). Vicki Miller, chief executive of VisitScotland, added: 'This comprehensive study showcases the important role golf plays in Scotland's visitor economy, with St. Andrews standing at the heart of this as a globally recognised asset. 'Scotland continues to be the destination of choice for golfers worldwide, and beyond the course, our renowned hospitality, culture, and heritage offer a truly distinctive and enriching experience for all who visit. We welcome this research, which reinforces Scotland's reputation as a world-leading tourism and events destination.' Professor Simon Shibli, from Sheffield Hallam University, said: 'Economic impact studies tend to look at the effects of one-off major sport events. For St. Andrews Links Trust we have had the opportunity to investigate the economic impact of a permanent year-round golf business. "Using gold standard methods to interview over 2,400 golfers, our research reveals a significant asset to the Scottish economy, which has arguably not been fully appreciated. St. Andrews Links Trust is not only a thriving business in its own right, it is also a catalyst for considerable tourism and employment benefits.'
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
The charts that show why Reeves's spending plans are a fantasy
Rachel Reeves claims she is investing in the country's Chancellor was cheered on by her front benches as she announced more money for the NHS, defence and schools in a move she boasted would lead to 'a national renewal'. In some senses, there were few surprises on Wednesday. We already knew how much Reeves had to dole out in her maiden spending review. The NHS gobbled up most of the money, with day-to-day spending on the Department of Health and Social Care growing by an average of 2.8pc a year over the forecast period. Defence spending has also received a significant boost as pressure from Nato mounts. Other departments, notably the Home Office, were squeezed as Reeves sought to make the sums add up. But while the numbers may tally on paper, economists are already questioning whether they will work in reality as pressures build from a more dangerous world and an older population. There are also fears that Reeves's announcement will pave the way for massive increases in council tax to keep Britain's streets safe. Paul Johnson, the director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS), says that while health and defence are big winners 'in pounds and pence, even here, one has to wonder whether this will be enough'. There are other pressures elsewhere. The Chancellor once vowed to never make an unfunded spending commitment but this week announced she will restore winter fuel payments to most pensioners with no clues as to how it will be paid for. She has also announced a Fair Pay Agreement for social care, which will set minimum terms across the sector without any clarity on how the proposals will be funded. Welfare spending, which sits outside Whitehall budgets, is poised to keep ballooning over the next five years as the Government prepares another about-turn to planned cuts to disability benefits. And unresolved questions over levies such as fuel duty will also pile more pressure on the Chancellor. While Reeves's statement is meant to set in stone government spending plans for at least the next three years, her £40bn tax raid last year may not be enough to foot the eventual bill. The tax burden is already on course to reach a peacetime high, but JP Morgan and Capital Economics both believe that Reeves will have to raise taxes by more than £20bn in the Budget this autumn to cover her increased spending plans and fend off increasing pressure from Reform. 'The spending review contains few surprises,' says Elliott Jordan-Doak, at Pantheon Macroeconomics. 'The question is only how big tax hikes will be in October.' The Government hinted on Wednesday that council tax would rise sharply to pay for policing after Reeves cut the Home Office budget by 2.2pc. Reeves claimed 'police spending power' would increase by 2.3pc in the coming years, which documents suggest could include more money from council tax. The Liberal Democrats said families in typical Band D households now faced a £395 increase in council tax by the next election. While the NHS is clearly a winner, there are already questions over whether the money will be enough to keep the health service running. Analysis by the IFS shows there have been just two occasions – in 1991 and 2004 – where health spending grew more slowly than envisaged in the spending review. More often, governments have been forced to top up health budgets to boost day-to-day health spending, which is on course to rise from a 26pc share of Whitehall budgets in 1999 to more than 40pc by the end of the decade. Reeves has set out plans to increase the NHS day-to-day budget more slowly than its historical average – by 3pc in real terms compared to 3.6pc – despite growing pressures on the health service. The plan set out by the previous Conservative government assumed real-terms funding increases of around 3.6pc per year. Johnson says: 'Aiming to get back to meeting the NHS 18 week target for hospital waiting times within this parliament is enormously ambitious – an NHS funding settlement below the long-run average might not measure up.' The plans also revealed the front-loaded nature of many of the settlements, with NHS capital spending set to remain flat in real terms for the rest of the decade after this year. The Office for Budget Responsibility, the Government's tax and spending watchdog, believes pressures from an older and sicker population will increase demand for NHS services by 1.1pc per year alone. 'The pressure to spend more on the NHS will still be great even after today's announcement,' says Jordan-Doak. Economists also questioned whether the health department's pledge to find £9bn in efficiency savings by the end of the decade was credible. Labour will unveil a refreshed NHS 10-year plan in the coming months, which is expected to demand more spending on staff and equipment to deal with Britain's demographic challenge. Another winner from Wednesday's spending review was defence, with spending in this area on track to rise to 2.6pc of GDP by 2027. But there was no mention of a 3pc target which Sir Keir Starmer has committed to, let alone the 3.5pc goal Nato is piling pressure on countries to reach. Increasing defence spending from 2.5pc of GDP to 3pc represents an increase of £17bn by the end of the decade. That's the equivalent of an extra 2p on income tax. Johnson says: 'On defence, it's entirely possible that an increase in the Nato spending target will mean that maintaining defence spending at 2.6pc of GDP no longer cuts the mustard.' There are also doubts about whether Reeves will be able to force through the cuts envisioned for the departments that lost out in Wednesday's announcement – including the Home Office, transport, Foreign Office and environment departments, which will suffer cuts in real terms. Even schools will get a real-terms freeze if you strip out the cost of expanding free school meals. In fact, departmental spending to 2028 will on average grow more slowly than under plans Rishi Sunak set out in the Conservatives' last spending review in 2021. 'We think that these real-terms spending cuts will be impossible to deliver given the pressure on public services and voters' demands for increased spending,' says Jordan-Doak. Then there are the Chancellor's investment plans. Capital spending is set to rise by £113bn over this parliament, with money going on everything from transport to green energy, new prisons and housing. Reeves is gambling that this investment blitz can kick-start growth. But as with any gamble, there is a risk it could go wrong. 'If the Government insists on accumulating the extra spending it's planning over the full parliament, it seems only fair to also draw attention to the £140bn of extra borrowing we're forecast to do over the same period,' says Johnson, at the IFS. Extra borrowing will keep Britain's debt pile rising every year until the end of the decade. 'That borrowing incurs a cost in the form of additional debt interest – and one that's bigger than it was a year ago,' says Johnson. The question was always whether the extra investment would bring sufficient benefits to make that worthwhile.' Government borrowing costs rose in the immediate aftermath of Reeves's announcement. Andrew Goodwin, at Oxford Economics, calculates that the Chancellor's already wafer-thin £9.9bn headroom to meet her borrowing rules has already been eroded by £2.5bn as a result of higher gilt yields. And while Reeves boasts about all the extra investment being pumped into the economy, another key question is: will she be able to get all of that money out the door? Previous analysis by the Resolution Foundation shows that successive governments of all stripes have struggled to spend all the money they wanted. Just £1 in every £6 in planned investment spending over the past seven spending reviews since 1998 actually went out the door. Why? Governments are often too optimistic about when projects become shovel-ready. There may be planning hold-ups, and the construction sector may not be able to cope with all that extra demand for engineers, project managers and construction workers to deliver these projects. 'We now know more about what sorts of projects the Government plans to invest in,' Johnson says. 'The focus must now shift to delivery and avoiding the all-too-common project over-runs.' Governments have in the past raided capital budgets in order to make their day-to-day spending budgets add up. New safeguards have been introduced to in theory prevent this from happening again. But this may simply make it harder for Labour to meet spending demands if plans go awry without putting up tax. Ben Ramanauskas, at Policy Exchange, casts doubt on Labour's ability to live within its means. He says: 'While the uplift to the defence and criminal justice budgets are welcome, this is unlikely to go far enough. Instead the Chancellor has chosen to prioritise the NHS by giving it even more money, without insisting on productivity improvements.' All this is expected to keep the size of the state permanently bigger than its pre-lockdown size. Ramanauskas says: 'The Government is yet to set out how it will fund its largesse to the public sector. However, it will almost certainly have to place even greater strain on the public finances by increasing borrowing or adding extra burdens to households and businesses by raising taxes.' 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. Sign in to access your portfolio
