BREAKING: the DWP has JUST published the winter fuel payments cut ASSESSMENT – undermining Keir Starmer
The controversy over the Labour Party government’s cut to winter fuel payments continues to dominate the news. PM Keir Starmer and health secretary Wes Streeting have both denied that the government did an impact assessment on the effect of the cut on older people. However, late on Friday 13 September the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) threw them and Labour under the bus – by PUBLISHING an Equality Analysis it did in July.
Crucially, it found that disabled people will be hit hard by the cut.
Winter fuel payments cut: where’s the impact assessment?
Labour’s cut to winter fuel payments has sparked uproar. As the Canary has been documenting, Charity Age UK has calculated that Labour’s move will impact 800,000 older people on very low incomes. Specifically, this is those living on less than £218.25 a week as single pensioners, or £332.95 as couples.
And despite the government’s drive to increase uptake in Pension Credit – the benefit that automatically entitles pensioners to the winter fuel payments – the majority will still miss out this winter.
On top of this, Age UK estimated that around a million more pensioners less than £50 above the so-called poverty line will be “hit hard” by the Labour removing the benefit payment. Meanwhile, in 2017 Labour itself did an impact assessment which found around 4,000 older people could die as a result of means testing the winter fuel payment.
However, late on 13 September the DWP threw the cat further amongst the pigeons. Because despite Starmer and Streeting denying it repeatedly and live on TV, there is an assessment – of sorts.
The DWP: well, here’s an Equality Analysis…
In a Freedom of Information (FOI) request, the DWP revealed it had done an assessment – an “Equality Analysis” – back in July. In short, it found:
83% (2.7m) of those aged 80+ currently receiving winter fuel payments will lose out, compared to 90% (7.3m) of those aged 66 to 79.
The cut will hit more women than men. 54% (6.1m) of those who received a winter fuel payment in 2022/23 were Female, and 46% (5.2m) were Male. This means that 85% (5.2m) of women receiving a WFP will lose out, compared to 91% (4.8m) of men.
However, for disabled older people the winter fuel payment cut will also be bad. The DWP noted that:
We do not have published information relating to disability of WFP recipients. However, as a proxy we can look at those in receipt of the State Pension (as almost all of those on State
Pension receive a WFP), and whether or not they received a pensioner disability benefit (AA/DLA/PIP). Latest available data (May-23) shows that 20% (2.6m) of State Pension recipients claim AA/DLA/PIP.
It concluded that:
53% (0.8m) of the latest available (May-23) PC caseload claim AA/DLA/PIP. Therefore, those with a disability will be disproportionately likely to retain the winter fuel payment. However, around 71% (1.6m) of people with a disability will still lose entitlement.
So, it seems that as always, women and disabled people will be hit hardest by the government’s cut. However, that’s not the end of the story.
Winter fuel payments: it’s not over, yet
comments given to The Herald earlier this week by the DWP insisting an impact assessment on the policy had been done.
The Herald also reported that senior figures in the DWP had advised the Chancellor not to introduce means testing of the benefit.
After days of No 10 refusing to comment, Keir Starmer’s deputy spokesperson said the only assessment made before the policy announcement was a standard legal one of potential equalities impacts.
So, while the Equality Assessment is not a full impact assessment, it seems that the DWP may have intentionally dumped this out late on a Friday night to cause problems for Starmer and Labour.
The DWP’s release of this data now poses major problems for the government. It confirms that disabled people will be hit hard – and that’s just the tip of the iceberg. Starmer should now have to ensure the department does an impact assessment. Whether he does or not, remains to be seen.
Featured image via the Canary
Comments 2
Leave a Reply
The Canary
PO Box 71199
LONDON
SE20 9EX
Canary Media Ltd – registered in England. Company registration number 09788095.
For guest posting, contact [email protected]
For other enquiries, contact: [email protected]
© Canary Media Ltd 2026, all rights reserved | Website by Monster | Hosted by Krystal | Privacy Settings
Man, am I weary of this constant demonisation and targeting of disabled people, me being one. Every single government picks on us, nothing is done to improve employment chances for younger disabled people , and then they are stigmatised as scroungers. Nothing changes. Well, it does. It gets worse. We are ignored by MSM, unless they decide to publish info on benefit cheats. There is so much inequality, worse than ever before in my lifetime, and nothing positive with this allegedly ‘Labour’, (which it isn’t), government. They are hellbent on making it worse for women, pensioners, and disabled people.
I’m a little confused by your figures as you say “This means that 85% (5.2m) of women receiving a WFP will lose out, compared to 91% (4.8m) of men.” and “around 71% (1.6m) of people with a disability will still lose entitlement.”
So that’s 91% of Men, 85% of Women and 71% of people with a disability (unclear if these are already included in the Men and Women)
You then say: “So, it seems that as always, women and disabled people will be hit hardest by the government’s cut ”
Now I fully understand that some disabled people may well have additional needs to keep warm, but the figures you quote actually clearly show that Men will be disproportionately harder hit than Women, and Disabled people will be least hit.
If what you are trying to point out is that only those getting some sort of top up benefits are getting the WFP and that this must mean that a greater proportion of Women and Disabled people must be getting those benefits, which means they must have been worse off in the first place, then that is clearly the case, and you should have stated it more directly.
Which brings me to the earlier statement, that “Labour’s move will impact 800,000 older people on very low incomes. Specifically, this is those living on less than £218.25 a week as single pensioners, or £332.95 as couples”
In fact these are the very people who this cut should not affect as anyone below that level is eligible for Pension Credits to top them up to that level, and even recieving a penny of pension credit makes them eligible for the WFP.
I am fully aware that there are many people below this income level who do not claim Pension Credits, but if anything positive at all comes out of this it is the huge amount of publicity about, and encouragement to claim, Pension Credits that is now in much of the media, including the very sources who normally refer to people claiming any benefits as Scroungers; an idea which has been the main cause of so many eligible OAPs not claiming, and becoming so reliant on the WFP as the one non means tested extra income (i.e. just paid out, not claimed and checked up on) available to them.
The people to feel sorry for are those who’s income is just a little over the £218.15, who won’t be able to claim the WFP, don’t have the spare cash to cover it, and now have to make it through this Winter, before the promised rise in Pensions next year.
I fully recognise that Women and people with disabilities often get the worst of government policies, but being devisive and saying this group are doing better or worse than that group isn’t really helping all of the disadvantaged pull together, in fact it’s exactly the same trick politicians and the media play saying we mustn’t help desperate refugees because we’re already not helping the desperate (poor, homeless, etc.etc.) already here.