To receive Motions on Notice under Council Procedure Rule 12.

 

MOTION:  Winter Fuel Allowance and protecting pensioners from fuel poverty.

 

This Council is very concerned by the recent decision of the government, confirmed by a House of Commons vote on 10th September 2024,  to restrict the Winter Fuel Payment to only pensioners in receipt of certain means-tested benefits.  This will affect over 2 million pensioners nationally and, in East Lindsey,  over 36000 vulnerable pensioners will now not receive the Winter Fuel Payment. Forcing many into “ heat or eat” dilemmas during the coldest months of the year with direct impacts on health and wellbeing. 

 

Leading charities including, Age UK, highlight the social injustice and the health risks of this sudden policy change and the additional strain this will place on some of our most vulnerable residents, many of whom don’t claim Pension Credit despite being eligible.

 

We ask that this Council:

 

·       Continue to promote the uptake of the Pension Credit benefit through Council services, partnerships, charities and community organisations. We need to make sure our most vulnerable pensioners are supported in claiming their entitlement.

 

·       To support our residents across the district, this council should register its strong disapproval with the government and Members of Parliament for taking away the winter fuel payment. It fails to acknowledge the plight of those now discriminated against who do not qualify within the threshold for support and yet fall below the income level of those who do not need the payment. Many of our rural residents, unlike their metropolitan cousins, do not have the luxury of having a gas supply to their homes and in the case of oil, wood, LPG and solid fuel must pay upfront prior to delivery for their winter fuel. Finding a large sum to cover this cost can and does force people into very dire straits. The unintended consequences have not all been identified or even been considered.

 

·       Commits to signing the ‘Save the Winter Fuel Payment for Struggling Pensioners’ petition being run by Age UK and write to all members offering them the opportunity to sign the petition themselves.

 

Proposed Cllr Carl Macey

Seconded Cllr Dan McNally

The following Motion was received in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 12:

 

Winter Fuel Allowance and protecting pensioners from fuel poverty.

 

‘This Council is very concerned by the recent decision of the government, confirmed by a House of Commons vote on 10th September 2024, to restrict the Winter Fuel Payment to only pensioners in receipt of certain means-tested benefits.  This will affect over 2 million pensioners nationally and, in East Lindsey, over 36000 vulnerable pensioners will now not receive the Winter Fuel Payment. Forcing many into “ heat or eat” dilemmas during the coldest months of the year with direct impacts on health and wellbeing. 

 

Leading charities including, Age UK, highlight the social injustice and the health risks of this sudden policy change and the additional strain this will place on some of our most vulnerable residents, many of whom don’t claim Pension Credit despite being eligible.

 

We ask that this Council:

 

·       Continue to promote the uptake of the Pension Credit benefit through Council services, partnerships, charities and community organisations. We need to make sure our most vulnerable pensioners are supported in claiming their entitlement.

 

·       To support our residents across the district, this council should register its strong disapproval with the government and Members of Parliament for taking away the winter fuel payment. It fails to acknowledge the plight of those now discriminated against who do not qualify within the threshold for support and yet fall below the income level of those who do not need the payment. Many of our rural residents, unlike their metropolitan cousins, do not have the luxury of having a gas supply to their homes and in the case of oil, wood, LPG and solid fuel must pay upfront prior to delivery for their winter fuel. Finding a large sum to cover this cost can and does force people into very dire straits. The unintended consequences have not all been identified or even been considered.

 

·       Commits to signing the ‘Save the Winter Fuel Payment for Struggling Pensioners’ petition being run by Age UK and write to all members offering them the opportunity to sign the petition themselves’.

 

Proposed Cllr Carl Macey

 

Seconded Cllr Daniel McNally

 

In his introduction, Councillor Macey thanked Councillors Makinson-Sanders and Simpson and the East Lindsey Independent Group for their endorsement of this motion.

 

Councillor Macey highlighted his disappointment that the Labour government were removing the winter fuel payment from some of the most vulnerable and elderly residents which was often a lifeline to them through the coldest of months.  He was further concerned that the government had not undertaken an impact assessment to see how many of the elderly and vulnerable residents this would affect, or the detrimental impact that would be put on the NHS and social care system.

 

Councillor Macey strongly urged all Members to support the Motion.

 

Councillor Daniel McNally seconded the Motion.

 

Whilst agreeing with the sentiment of the Motion, a Member highlighted his disappointment that the proposal had been politicised by colleagues and asked that this debate remained about the interest of vulnerable and elderly people, following which this comment was endorsed by a number of Members.  It was further highlighted that the newly elected Labour government had removed the winter fuel payment despite making an absolute commitment that it would remain.

 

Following which, an amendment to the Motion was proposed by Councillor Ros Jackson, Leader of the Labour Group as follows:

 

‘Remove paragraph four (bullet point 2) and replace with the following:

 

·       Urges government to revise the threshold for qualifying for credit benefits to enable more lower-income pensioners to receive the winter fuel allowance;

·       Request the Executive Board to consider adding a fifth target area to the £10m East Lindsey Investment Fund, targeting help for vulnerable households in fuel poverty to increase the energy efficiency of homes rated D to G;

·       Request the Executive Board to consider ensuring funds from the Household Support Fund also help households and residents in fuel poverty who may not be in receipt of benefits but who miss out by a small amount and publicising this information in ways accessible to pensioners with disabilities’.

 

Councillor David Hall seconded the Amendment.

 

In her introduction, Councillor Jackson considered that the original Motion was weak and the amendment proposed actions that sat within the Council’s control to make a real difference to pensioners in fuel poverty, whereas the original Motion would not do so as it stood.  Councillor Jackson further highlighted her disappointment that none of the £10m East Lindsey Investment Fund had been allocated to improving pensioners’ energy efficiency and further considered that the Council needed to boost the Household Support Fund by promoting it to disabled people in ways they could access this quickly.

 

Speaking to the substantive Motion, the following comments were received:

 

·       A Member could not support the amendment as he did not agree with using the East Lindsey Investment Fund.  He highlighted that other funding schemes were in place that could provide residents with financial assistance and considered that it was about connecting with residents to advise them what support was in place.  He further referred to other schemes currently in place to make homes safer and more energy efficient.

 

In response, Councillor Jackson advised that she had spoken to the Heart Team and Group Manager, Climate Change and Environment who had advised that there was further scope for more and stated that there was a huge need for retrofitting homes for improving people’s energy efficiency.

 

·       A Member added that he would also not be supporting the amendment and was very concerned for over 400 people in his ward that lived in old traditional trailer parks as permanent residents which used a huge amount of energy to heat.  He added that the Council and other councils across the county had a lot of work to do to ensure that its vulnerable and elderly residents received all the help and support they needed.  Members were urged to support the original motion.

 

·       The Leader of the Council stated that he would not be supporting the amendment.  He highlighted the excellent work that the Council had undertaken under the current administration to support its most vulnerable and elderly residents and also by the officers within the teams that made residents aware of the benefits and services available to them.  It was considered that approximately 40,000 residents would be affected by the withdrawal of the winter fuel allowance.  The Leader of the Council added that he would be writing to the government to make clear the Council’s strong disapproval of the government’s poor decision for taking away the winter fuel allowance.  However, it was highlighted that the Council did a lot for its communities and an aspect of the £10m East Lindsey Investment Fund included a community aspect which would go to support town and parish halls in disparate communities.

 

In response, Councillor Jackson considered the Conservative Group Members had added politics into the debate and highlighted that a choice could be made that would make a difference.

 

·       A Member did not agree with the part of the amendment that related to a fifth target area to help vulnerable households in fuel poverty to increase the energy efficiency of homes.  He highlighted that most energy grants did not cover 100% of the costs and many people could not afford to pay the difference.  It was further considered that there was no time for this work to be undertaken before the cold weather arrived.  Therefore, he would not be supporting the amendment.

 

In response, Councillor Jackson stated that some good points had been made in relation to energy efficiency grants, however considered if a proportion of money was allocated from the East Lindsey Investment Fund the Council could set the criteria for helping residents.  It was further highlighted that the government had to take a decision in year to make savings, and there were very few ways that this amount of savings could have been achieved in a year.  Councillor Jackson also considered that by writing to the government in good time ahead of the budget on 30 October was worthwhile.

 

·       The Portfolio Holder for Communities and Better Ageing strongly objected to the amendment for a number of reasons.  He highlighted that pension credit was a notoriously underclaimed benefit and by removing the winter fuel allowance, many residents would suffer unnecessarily. There were approximately 10,000 low-income households in East Lindsey who were currently in receipt of pension credit, but many more eligible.  In 2022/23, over 40,000 East Lindsey residents received the winter fuel allowance, a large percentage who were now no longer eligible.

 

The Council employed an Age Friendly Communities Officer who raised awareness to encourage people to apply for pension credit and provided advice.  Lincs Digital also worked closely with residents across the district to offer drop-in sessions, including bespoke pension credit eligibility and checking sessions.  Work was also undertaken by a host of age friendly work and through this considerable support and funding was afforded to the most vulnerable people in the district.

 

In response, Councillor Jackson acknowledged what was already being done, however highlighted that currently more needed to be done to tackle the issue of withdrawal of the winter fuel allowance and the position it left vulnerable and elderly residents in.

 

·       A Member commented that the Labour Group had already written to the government and asked that the pension credit threshold be lowered so more people became eligible to claim and was happy to support the amendment.

 

·       A Member stated that he would be supporting the amendment and was disappointed by the extent several councillors had politicised the motion in the Chambers.  He highlighted that the motion should be debated in terms of the interest of the residents independently and separately from the national issues which several councillors had done.

 

·       In support of the amendment, a Member was disappointed with those Members who considered that the topic of withdrawing the winter fuel allowance should not be made political, particularly as it would severely affect vulnerable and elderly residents.

 

·       A Member commented that he could not support the amendment as he strongly considered that the £10m East Lindsey Investment Fund should remain for the purpose it had been allocated.

 

In response, Councillor Jackson stated that she understood Skegness was reluctant to lose any funding for events, however sometimes difficult choices had to be made.

 

In summing up, Councillor Jackson thanked her colleagues on the Labour Group for their support on the motion.

 

Upon being put to the vote, the Amendment was lost.

 

Following which, Members were invited to speak to the original motion.

 

·       A Member supported the motion and hoped that the government would readjust its decision which had been made in haste.

 

·       The Portfolio Holder for Planning stated that he was happy to support the substantive motion.  However, he acknowledged the shock that residents felt when they had already planned their household budget and to have the winter fuel allowance taken away with no notice.

 

·       The Leader of the East Lindsey Independent Group stated that her Group undertook their roles to support residents and not to make a political statement.  It was highlighted that residents in rural areas often did not benefit from a mains gas supply and had to pay up front for gas cylinders and heating oil.  Members were advised that 29% of East Lindsey residents were in the older age group and taking away the winter fuel allowance would have an effect on health challenges that would be made worse.

 

·       The Portfolio Holder for Coastal Economy congratulated Councillors McNally and Macey for the excellent motion and highlighted the second paragraph with regards to difficulties for residents paying up front for oil, wood, LPG and solid fuel.  He further highlighted the deprivation along the coast and stated that he was happy to support the motion.

 

·       A Member commented that she only supported the motion as far as challenging the pension credit element of entitlement.

 

·       A Member considered that if the motion had been written in terms that were less editorialising politically it may have commanded the unanimous support of Councillors.  Therefore, he was unable to support the motion.

 

·       A Member commented that he was happy to support the motion, however wished to highlight that part of it was put forward by the East Lindsey Independent Group.

 

In response, the Leader of the Council highlighted that it was quite rare that the Council engaged in a fracturing political debate, however considered that it was proper to occasionally have one and it was important that Members expressed their opinions.  The Leader of the Council added that he was happy to support the motion, and if passed would write to the Chancellor to highlight that the withdrawal of the winter fuel allowance was very damaging for rural communities, particularly the ageing communities.  He stated that he was happy for the letter to be countersigned by all Group Leaders and hoped that this was an act of conciliation in respect to making the motion non-political.

 

As seconder to the substantive motion, Councillor McNally stated that he was disappointed that a number of Members considered that the motion was political.  He reiterated that the abolishment of the winter fuel allowance would have far reaching consequences for up to 36k residents across the district and was not prepared to stand by whilst elderly and vulnerable residents were treated in such an appalling way.  Councillor McNally thanked Members for their support and asked that they supported the motion.

 

In his summary to the original Motion, Councillor Macey thanked all Members across the Chambers for their comments and a good debate and points which were well made.  He highlighted that the word ‘choices’ had been used several times and that it was a choice by government to remove the winter fuel allowance for up to 36k residents in East Lindsey.  He considered that this was not right, and asked Members to support the motion.

 

Upon being put to the vote, the motion was carried.

 

RESOLVED

 

That the Motion be supported.

 

N.B.  Councillor Claire Arnold left the Meeting at 8.08pm.