WFP and politics

[Sazza]

Thanks. I honestly cannot remember if I started the topic or not. I suspect I was responding to someone's aside re WFP!
I nearly used the "don't talk politics or religion" quote when defending myself but there are only so many clichés I can post!

You didn't start the subject

 

[Lord Helpus]

To be fair you explain well the monetary problems of the country.
I know very little about such matters apart from that we as a country are massively in debt. Not only too mention collective personal debt which I understand is also enormously huge.
I have no answers or solutions.
It seems crazy that we are doing £102 billion in interest up the wall every year.
But to take away the £300 to save what is a comparatively small amount of money is wrong.
After all, will it not cost to means test and likely more people to claim PC maybe?
Funny they didn't mention any of this pre re-election in the manifesto?
I more than sure they will more than rue this decision in the future especially when all the other stuff that comes out inevitably in next few years.

Or even the next few months.

 

[Lilo Lil]

if taking away the equivalent of less than 2 cups of coffee at Costa (or wherever) per week from the pensioners saves the country I am all for it …

It could be seen as a tad mean otherwise…

 

[donna255]

Er, I just actually looked at my electric account and I have £881.11 in credit!! I only put £10 per week into gas and electric now. I was even told by my electric company I don't use much electric.

Oh, I would not get £300 winter heating thing only people over £75 got that I would have got £200. It was paid by household, not person in the home.

Yet they still pay the £10 Xmas bonus which is a joke, paid to people on pensions and certain sickness benefits. When it was introduced back in the 1970s, a friend told me her mother was able to pay a week's rent and buy Xmas dinner. I am in N.I. but in the Republic at Xmas all pensioners get an extra week's state pension paid to them. It used to be an extra 2 weeks a few years back.

Things will be getting more expensive because it looks like an all out war in the Middle East, which will affect the oil prices.

 

[Lord Helpus]

Er, I just actually looked at my electric account and I have £881.11 in credit!! I only put £10 per week into gas and electric now. I was even told by my electric company I don't use much electric.

Oh, I would not get £300 winter heating thing only people over £75 got that I would have got £200. It was paid by household, not person in the home.

Yet they still pay the £10 Xmas bonus which is a joke, paid to people on pensions and certain sickness benefits. When it was introduced back in the 1970s, a friend told me her mother was able to pay a week's rent and buy Xmas dinner. I am in N.I. but in the Republic at Xmas all pensioners get an extra week's state pension paid to them. It used to be an extra 2 weeks a few years back.

Things will be getting more expensive because it looks like an all out war in the Middle East, which will affect the oil prices.

Fuel duty rises in the budget will send prices soaring anyway so motorists are in for a tough time.

And no, we can't all afford to buy electric cars even if we wanted to and in any case energy costs are going up and they are likely to be paying road tax soon.

 

[stratobuddy]

Fuel duty rises in the budget will send prices soaring anyway so motorists are in for a tough time.

And no, we can't all afford to buy electric cars even if we wanted to and in any case energy costs are going up and they are likely to be paying road tax soon.

Up to £600 per year, according to my local rag.

 

[Patsy]

Er, I just actually looked at my electric account and I have £881.11 in credit!! I only put £10 per week into gas and electric now. I was even told by my electric company I don't use much electric.

Oh, I would not get £300 winter heating thing only people over £75 got that I would have got £200. It was paid by household, not person in the home.

Yet they still pay the £10 Xmas bonus which is a joke, paid to people on pensions and certain sickness benefits. When it was introduced back in the 1970s, a friend told me her mother was able to pay a week's rent and buy Xmas dinner. I am in N.I. but in the Republic at Xmas all pensioners get an extra week's state pension paid to them. It used to be an extra 2 weeks a few years back.

Things will be getting more expensive because it looks like an all out war in the Middle East, which will affect the oil prices.

It must cost more to send the derisory £10 out,it's an insult. They talk about it as though they are giving you the earth.

 

[Wanderer]

I wonder what the cost implications are of just paying WFP to all pensioners vs not paying it to all and having to administer a system to provide it (or similar financial topup) to those who do actually need it.

I think we as a country and individuals really need to think about and discuss what we actually need vs expect to be provided with by the state/taxpayer during our lifetime.

 

[Patsy]

I wonder what the cost implications are of just paying WFP to all pensioners vs not paying it to all and having to administer a system to provide it (or similar financial topup) to those who do actually need it.

I think we as a country and individuals really need to think about and discuss what we actually need vs expect to be provided with by the state/taxpayer during our lifetime.

I'd start with MP's exorbitant expenses for a start.

 

[PhaedrusR]

I wonder what the cost implications are of just paying WFP to all pensioners vs not paying it to all and having to administer a system to provide it (or similar financial topup) to those who do actually need it.

I think we as a country and individuals really need to think about and discuss what we actually need vs expect to be provided with by the state/taxpayer during our lifetime.

This is why I think they have used Pension Credit as the WFP threshold. An existing scheme that vets income. And so they change the DWP computer to only pay WFP to those on Pension Credit.
To implement a new WFP means-tested scheme at a different threshold would cost £Xmillion more, but the saving is around £3bn I believe.

I'd start with MP's exorbitant expenses for a start.

These fatuous comparisons don't help the debate. Like Starmer's expense donations.
Yes, MP expenses and donations (savings him claiming expenses, actually) are an issue but the costs involved pale in comparison.

What is it Churchill said about democracy being the best worst form of government. We elect MPs, they represent policies, they make decisions on our behalf.

 

[Patsy]

This is why I think they have used Pension Credit as the WFP threshold. An existing scheme that vets income. And so they change the DWP computer to only pay WFP to those on Pension Credit.
To implement a new WFP means-tested scheme at a different threshold would cost £Xmillion more, but the saving is around £3bn I believe.

These fatuous comparisons don't help the debate. Like Starmer's expense donations.
Yes, MP expenses and donations (savings him claiming expenses, actually) are an issue but the costs involved pale in comparison.

What is it Churchill said about democracy being the best worst form of government. We elect MPs, they represent policies, they make decisions on our behalf.

It is a valid comparison NOT fatuous. They've all got their snouts in the trough and stuff the rest of us.

 

[Wanderer]

I'd start with MP's exorbitant expenses for a start.

Whilst I agree some may claim more than is necessary not all do.

If we don't pay/allow them enough then they will simply look for employment elsewhere, so we lose whatever skills and talents they may bring to the table. I do wish my wages had gone up in line with their increases over the last ten years though.

 

[Wanderer]

I wonder what the cost implications are of just paying WFP to all pensioners vs not paying it to all and having to administer a system to provide it (or similar financial topup) to those who do actually need it.

I think we as a country and individuals really need to think about and discuss what we actually need vs expect to be provided with by the state/taxpayer during our lifetime.

I forgot to add that "we" also need to decide how prepared we are to pay for it all.

 

[Lord Helpus]

I'd start with MP's exorbitant expenses for a start.

Reeves doesn't think some pensioners deserve the winter fuel allowance but claims thousands in heating for her London home.

Not content with this hypocrisy she robs the pensioners to pay the train drivers £10K more per year.

This is a ****** awful government.

 

[PhaedrusR]

It is a valid comparison NOT fatuous. They've all got their snouts in the trough and stuff the rest of us.

Is that what you really think of most MPs? Just there to line their own pockets?

This reactionary view is emotional, understandable but doesn't help with the real issues.

Many of them seem decent people who want to represent and make a change for good.
My MP was earning more working as an accountant than they get as an MP and only got into politics due to issues locally and stood locally and then as an MP to make a change. I don't greatly support their party/politics, but they are a good constituency MP, stand up for local and national issues and want to help and are not there to make money.

There will always be some who abuse the system.
The expenses rules need addressing. Make clear what and what isn't a valid London/nearby home for attending parliament and what expenses are valid.
Otherwise stop second homes and just pay for them to travel and/or stay in hotels.

A government policy to save £3bn with WFP changes is not related to what expenses MPs validly, or contentiously, claim.

 

[PhaedrusR]

Reeves doesn't think some pensioners deserve the winter fuel allowance but claims thousands in heating for her London home.

Not content with this hypocrisy she robs the pensioners to pay the train drivers £10K more per year.

This is a ****** awful government.

Well far be it for me to say "I told you so" but I'm old enough now to have seen Blair, Brown and lived during Wilson/Callaghan.

Conservatives were unelectable and Labour would cost you more. Hobson's choice.

Sunak warned that Labour would cost more!

Problem with Labour is they don't seem to negotiate or play hardball with the unions, like the way Blair gave the GPs new contract everything the BMA wanted. I don't mind getting an agreement with RMT and GPs and nurses but have to negotiate, not just cave or at least get productivity or agreement to beneficial reforms.

I don't know if the £22m black hole is due to pay settlements or how much the Tories didn't account for.
But WFP is the initial result, but lots more cuts or taxes to come I fear.

As has been said before, none of the politicians are telling the truth over the Country's finances, the reality of the financial position, taxes, the lack of money, borrowing, more for less, etc.

People just put their head in the sand and just want their little bubble financed and let someone else worry about paying for it all in the future.
Same as climate change.

 

[Wanderer]

For those interested in some of the expenses your MP claims for - https://www.theipsa.org.uk/mp-staffing-business-costs.

Just had a look at my local MP, last year for rental accomodation they claimed 3 times my yearly income.

 

[PhaedrusR]

For those interested in some of the expenses your MP claims for - https://www.theipsa.org.uk/mp-staffing-business-costs.

Just had a look at my local MP, last year for rental accomodation they claimed 3 times my yearly income.

My MPs office costs were £220k for staff, office, cleaning, etc., etc. with other costs, totalling £250k.
Was surprised at how high that is, employ more staff than I thought.

Multiply 650 MPs by £250k =

£163million

Are they worth it?

 

[PhaedrusR]

For those interested in some of the expenses your MP claims for - https://www.theipsa.org.uk/mp-staffing-business-costs.

Just had a look at my local MP, last year for rental accomodation they claimed 3 times my yearly income.

Found this too:

https://www.taxpayersalliance.com/briefing_the_cost_of_mps_in_2020_21

The total spend of members of parliament was £132.5 million in the 2020-21 financial year according to the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (IPSA). This was a 4.6 per cent increase on the £126.7 million spent in 2019-20.

The average cost of an MP was £203,880 in 2020-21, a 29.2 per cent increase from the average £157,747 spent in 2019-20. In 2019-20, the speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle had the largest total spend for a sitting MP at £259,057. In 2020-21, he cost the taxpayer £182,584