Rod Liddle: UK Correspondent on the reinstatement of the Winter Fuel Payments for pensioners

Keir Starmer has signalled a potential U-turn regarding the winter energy payments. 

Back in March, the UK government changed the rules for the Winter Fuel Payment, so that from winter 2024/25, it was only available to households that received the Pension Credit or certain other means-tested benefits. 

This made it so that only 1.5 million pensioners received the payment, down from 10.8 million.  

UK Correspondent Rod Liddle told Mike Hosking reinstating them looks like a defeat for Starmer, as it was his government that axed the payments in the first place. 

He says the Prime Minister’s in a difficult position. 

LISTEN ABOVE 

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Right open to Rod Little in Britain. Morning to you, Mike,
Good Mike, How does this we played clips earlier on
bed Knock v. Starma Stamer v. Bed Knock in the
House over the winter fuel payment back down. How ultimately
does this play out politically for him?

Speaker 2 (00:15):
I think it's less helpful to Starmer the if he
thinks it is. It would have been fine if the
winter fuel payments had been paid back in October November
last year or agreed to be paid. But reinstating them
aide us likely to defeat for Starma and doesn't really
get him any quedos as being kindly towards the pensions

(00:37):
because he stopped them in the first place. So there's
a real problem there, and that same problem will be
there if he tries to backtrack on benefit cuts as well.
For disability benefits. There is not a huge amount politically
to be gained whatever. Leaving aside here, Mike, what is
the right thing to do? As ever that there is

(00:58):
no great political gains from backtracking on stuff which he
already made the decision about because he has seemed to
be wrong. You know, it is a it's a difficult
position for it.

Speaker 1 (01:09):
How do I find the money, because I'm reading about
the hit room the other day, and this is Rachel
Reeves and whatever you call your offer, and we call
it the treasury. The Treasury gives advice and goes, well, listen,
under the current bill you're paying, you borrow too much,
you can't afford any more. Where do they get the
billions for this?

Speaker 2 (01:24):
I don't know, is the answer, and I don't think
they know either. It's the Office for a Budget Responsibility
over here, but also the Treasury. Of course, it's a
mystery to me, and it's a mystery to me, and
I think it is a mystery to Kiss star War
and indeed Rachel Reeves as to where they're going to
get the money for this much vaunted, huge expansion in

(01:44):
defense expenditure, which at first took Keir Starman said was
going to be three percent by the end of this
parliamentary term, and then changed his mind, backtracked, obfiscated, hopped
around a bit and said definitely three percent, but I'm
not going to tell you when it's just pathetic. So
there's a real problem with defense expenditure, especially as you

(02:07):
know NATO is expecting us to raise it, not manly
to three percent to three point five percentage, so's he's
caught on a number of issues, all the consequence of
a lack of cloth in the economy, a lack of
money in the economy, and a black hole in the finances.

Speaker 1 (02:24):
It's funny you should meet Well, it's not funny. I
mean it was overnight and we featured this as well,
this meeting that was held about Ukraine. Yet again the
Germans seemed very robust about me and IDA support. And
you need to spend some more money and we're all
heading towards five percent. How does all of this so
you spend on defense? Is that for you? And is
that separate to the money you might give to Ukraine
to go buy some more drones to bomb some more bridges.

Speaker 2 (02:46):
Absolutely not clear the theory. It should be for us.
And look, the Ukrainian money is separate to that. He
is already by the way, you know, a long time
ago suggested that they cut into the overseas a budget
to take it up by the money which we're spent
on Ukraine, which is over seas eight of course, but no,

(03:07):
we're apparently buying loads nuclear subs to carry nukes around
the world. I don't know how modern money is. I'm
not a military expert, but that seems to be the plan.
So that is where the vast bulk of the money
coming from those promised additions to the defense budget will

(03:27):
be spent. I would rather it was spent on, you know,
the rather more savvy counter espionage, which we're suffering very
much every week over here from either Russia or China
or a combination of the two, in cyber crime, in
disruption of industry, etc. Etc.

Speaker 1 (03:48):
It's funny should say that I forgot to mention a
couple of days ago to you, but you're this fourth.
I've got now four people sitting fire to Kostama's houses
and cows and stuff like that. I mean four people
that are all Ukraine. And you're right, I mean, clearly
there's something abnormal about.

Speaker 2 (04:02):
All the same there is something deeply abnormal about it.
There was actually three Ukrainians and run Room Median and
of course Rumedia as well is right up there on
that border, and Roumania is where quite a large number
of the Russian hackers have been based for quite a
long time. That it seems I cannot work out what

(04:28):
could possibly be the motive for this without Russia's direct involvement.
I just cannot work out what the motive could be.
These werefore as we call them colloquially over here, rent
boys who suddenly decided to step out of the Prime
Minister's house. Why did they decide to do that? You know,
it is it almost beggers belief that it is not

(04:50):
in some way masterminded from beyond.

Speaker 1 (04:52):
All right, man, you go, well, we'll catch up next week.
Rod A Little out of Britain.

Speaker 2 (04:56):
US.

Speaker 1 (04:56):
For more from the Mic Asking Breakfast, listen live to
Used to bok s at B from six am weekdays,
or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio