IN last week's “Courier”, it was reported that our MP Mel Stride has criticised the new government's plan to abolish the universal winter fuel payment for all pensioners, and restrict it to those who are in receipt of pension credit.

The news item quotes him as making the argument that if this comes into law, the many people who qualify for pension credit, but don't currently receive it, will be motivated to apply for it, thus keeping their winter fuel payment as well as at last receiving the financial help that they are entitled to.

He provides a calculation of how much more state funding will be paid out if this happens, but I notice he doesn't put this in the context of how much money will be saved by not giving winter fuel allowances to the more wealthy pensioners, so if his intention was to demonstrate what he calls the “economic illiteracy” of the new government, his stats are pretty ineffectual.

As Mr Stride, (who was Secretary for Work and Pensions up until a few weeks ago) must be aware, pension credit is not a nice little handout that any pensioner who fancies having a bit more money can claim, it is, like all state benefits, awarded to bring the qualifying person's income up to the barest minimum that the DWP deems is necessary for an older person to keep themselves warm, fed and clothed and to have somewhere safe to live.

And anyone who has ever tried to live on state benefits will know that the DWP have never been the most generous of benefactors in their calculations of how much someone needs to live on.

So for Mel Stride to send a warning to the Labour government that more people might feel inclined to apply for what they are entitled to instead of trying to make ends meet and possibly making choices between eating or putting heating on in the winter, as if this will be a negative outcome, seems extraordinary to me.

If this is the type of thinking that is representative of the conservative party as a whole, then they should be ashamed of themselves.

However, from a moral point of view I'm not sure that the government have got this right.

Having greatly appreciated the winter fuel payment I've received for the last two winters, I've been aware that we all have a tendency to criticise any policies which affect us adversely, regardless of the greater good.

But I'm still a baby state pensioner; I'm healthy, relatively fit and active, and I have a tiny NHS pension and am able to continue do part time self employed work at the moment, so although I am definitely on a low income, I know that if things get dire for me this winter, I will be able to get extra money by doing more work, even if its tiring.

What would it be like for someone older or frailer who isn't able to work (and why should they?) and who can't keep warm?

So I've been paying attention to the concerns of various older peoples' charities and organisations who have come out to express the opinion that the income level for cutting off this payment has been set too low, and I hope that the government (many of whose policies I broadly support) will rethink this one, before more people suffer this winter.

Penny King

Lapford