Tatton MP Esther McVey launched a scathing attack on the government’s cruel policy to scrap the winter fuel allowance for nearly 10 million pensioners – in a Parliamentary debate where opposition MPs tried to get the controversial policy dropped.
Ms McVey said the decision to “rob” millions of pensioners of the payment was “nothing to do with economics and everything to do with cynical political calculation.”
She accused government of pork barrel politics - taking money away from pensioners who Labour don’t think vote for them and giving it to train drivers who they believe do.
Ms McVey added: “Millions of pensioners, many of whom are struggling to make ends meet, are being sacrificed in this political strategic game. This government have been telling pensioners they didn’t want to do this, but that tough financial decisions must be made. But we all know that is poppycock.
“That wasn’t the government’s message to the already highly paid train drivers. When they met them, money was no object - have as much as you want. The public are not as stupid as the government think they are.”
Ms McVey also accused Labour of “breathtaking hypocrisy” as back in 2017 the Conservative manifesto included plans to look at means testing the benefit. Labour criticised the move and produced research which showed up to 4,000 pensioners lives will be put at risk and struggle to heat their homes. The policy was dropped by the Conservative Party.
“So, what are we seeing here, that a Labour Party when in office, ditches its beliefs and ditches its research,” Ms McVey said.
Ms McVey also urged government to set out details of any impact assessment it had done on the widespread damage this policy will do.
The Tatton MP – who wants the allowance reinstated for all pensioners - also criticised government for failing to allow proper scrutiny of the policy and instead only allowing retrospective scrutiny. All benefits regulations are required by law to be considered by the independent Social Security Advisory Committee (SSAC), which is usually done in advance. Labour has opted for the urgency provision, which allows SSAC consideration to be retrospective, which Ms McVey said equated to “bypassing SSAC scrutiny”.
