Angela Rayner refuses to rule out scrapping single person council tax discount

[Cherie]

y love-in with the Labour government lasted about two months.

I was down with Silver Fox Starmer and his new Downing Street kitten; club diva Angela Rayner on the decks in Ibiza made me smile. But it only lasted until this week’s Commons debate, where Tory MP Graham Stuart raised the issue of single person discount for council tax in the context of the government scrapping the winter fuel allowance for many pensioners.

Stuart said the council tax discount “is so important to pensioners, who are already losing out because of the absence of the winter fuel allowance”, and asked Rayner to guarantee that she would not scrap it. She would not.

And this is where my hackles raised, higher than the £592 a year extra that I will have to pay to my bankrupt Croydon Council if the 25 per cent discount to single households is scrapped.

Currently, anyone over 18 (and not just pensioners, Mr Stuart) living alone in a property, or with exempt people – live-in carers, students, anyone with a severe mental illness – can claim the discount, because a full council tax bill is based on at least two adults living in a home. According to ONS statistics, almost 1 in 3 households in the UK – 8.3 million – only have one person. You can see Labour’s Treasury team licking their lips as greedily as a cat who’s OD’d on Dreamies over the extra income they would gain to plug the £22bn financial black hole they were left with by the Tories.

But scrapping the discount (which isn’t much of a discount, merely a minor adjustment) would reveal the new government as steaming hypocrites, as big as their Tory predecessors.

Rayner promised Stuart that her government would not raise council tax – well, only for single people, who don’t seem to matter to her. And in his recent doom-laden speech, the prime minister said the October Budget would be painful, and that “those with the broadest shoulders should bear the heavier burden”. Presumably Mr Starmer believes that those of us who live alone are built like The Rock as he thinks we can take a massive hit if he removes the 25 per cent discount. But we can’t.

Last year, financial services company Hargreaves Lansdown calculated that singles pay an extra £860 a month for monthly bills compared to couples, adding up to just over £10,000 a year. How can the government really be looking to take money from people who already face a huge financial burden?

It’s bad enough for those who are single and without children to have to listen to Starmer talk about “hard-working families” all the time, but to ask us to pay more council tax, towards children we don’t have while there’s still no commitment to social care for those of us who don’t have families to look after us in our old age, is deeply unfair.

As a socialist, I believe that we should all contribute to society by paying our fair share towards it and supporting those in need – so I’m happy to pay towards education, health and public services for everyone. But the idea of taking even more cash from me for services I haven’t ever used is a low blow.

Single households are already a laughing stock – it’s not only JD Vance who’s doubling down on childless cat ladies, the whole world is giving us a kicking for being alone. I’ve always worked hard and paid my taxes on my never-very-fabulous salary, but I’m seen as an unkind person for wanting a little financial support by way of a council tax reduction. I can’t just make a live-in partner appear in order to halve my household bills, so all I want is some recognition from the government that my situation, and that of millions of others, deserves as much thought as those with families.

In his first speech as prime minister, Starmer said: “Your government should treat every single person in this country with respect.” But it looks like there could be no respect for those who already happily give more than their fair share.

Try a bit harder with tax evaders rather than those of us who can’t afford a holiday due to single supplements, Mr Starmer.

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/council-tax-discount-single-people-rayner-b2606761.html


on top of this it is alleged she will remove 'right to buy' which I think is fair enough although she benefited nicely from it herself

[user104658]

Surely they must mean an extra £860 a year not a month? What on earth are singles doing to spend an extra £10,000 a year on bills :umm2:.

But on thread topic... Yeah, it's depressing as fk. Literally just... some different Tories. Why does anyone bother voting at all? I was compelled to not bother. I went and voted out of a sense of duty to do so. Shouldn't have bothered.

[thesheriff443]

I’ve never voted and never will

[MTVN]

She'd better bloody not, think about us bachelors :oh:

Single people already have much higher costs of living

[arista]

Angela now Live On SkyNewsHD

[arista]

Angela now on BBC1

[AnnieK]

Surely they must mean an extra £860 a year not a month? What on earth are singles doing to spend an extra £10,000 a year on bills :umm2:.

But on thread topic... Yeah, it's depressing as fk. Literally just... some different Tories. Why does anyone bother voting at all? I was compelled to not bother. I went and voted out of a sense of duty to do so. Shouldn't have bothered.

I assume they have just taken an average household spend and assumed in a couple if normal household outgoings (rent, utilities, food) total say £1500 a couple will each pay £750 but a single person foots the bill for the lot therefore the difference each month will be pretty high. It's a bit crude as obviously there will be some bills that are lower for a single person....food etc but I would guess that's where they get the figure from

[Oliver_W]

People are surprised that Labour want to increase taxes on everyone?

[user104658]

I assume they have just taken an average household spend and assumed in a couple if normal household outgoings (rent, utilities, food) total say £1500 a couple will each pay £750 but a single person foots the bill for the lit therefore the difference each month will be pretty high. It's a bit crude as obviously there will be some bills that are lower for a single person....food etc but I would guess that's where they get the figure from

I suppose if they're including rents/mortgages then maybe, that's the only way it could be anything resembling normal outgoings surely. Although I am having flashbacks to our "energy crisis" December bill of £470 💀.

[bots]

Surely they must mean an extra £860 a year not a month? What on earth are singles doing to spend an extra £10,000 a year on bills :umm2:.

But on thread topic... Yeah, it's depressing as fk. Literally just... some different Tories. Why does anyone bother voting at all? I was compelled to not bother. I went and voted out of a sense of duty to do so. Shouldn't have bothered.

i would actually say that the tories have looked after the poorest in society better than labour, if this is the sort of stuff labour are going to do.

I can see plenty of strikes and organised protest coming in the future if they go down this path

[smudgie]

i would actually say that the tories have looked after the poorest in society better than labour, if this is the sort of stuff labour are going to do.

I can see plenty of strikes and organised protest coming in the future if they go down this path

No strikes. The union paymasters won’t allow it against Harmer Starmer.

[bots]

No strikes. The union paymasters won’t allow it against Harmer Starmer.

i would have said riots in the past, but i've adjusted that outcome :laugh:

[Cherie]

People are surprised that Labour want to increase taxes on everyone?

It's the complete hypocrisy that gets me, if the Tories had implemented the Winter fuel thing and apparently it was first mooted in Teresas Mays disasterous manifesto in 2017 and she was called out on it by Angela Rayner all hell would break loose, they would be accused of trying to kill off pensioners, if they do cut the single person discount which would apply in the main to lone pensioners I honestly think that is what they are trying to do, yes fine there is a black hole but did they need to give train drivers a back dated offer

train drivers deal includes a backdated 5% increase for 2019 to 2022, 4.75% for 2022 to 2024, and 4.5% for 2024 to 2025.

[user104658]

i would actually say that the tories have looked after the poorest in society better than labour, if this is the sort of stuff labour are going to do.

I can see plenty of strikes and organised protest coming in the future if they go down this path

Ish, though it's hard to make a direct comparison because we have no idea what the Tories would have done with another term, nor what Labour would have done in the COVID era. It's looking like they'd have done roughly the exact same, IMO. And I doubt they'd have had the blanket help (e.g. the gas and electricity £66 that everyone got) I think help would lihave been entirely means-teasted.

[GoldHeart]

Ish, though it's hard to make a direct comparison because we have no idea what the Tories would have done with another term, nor what Labour would have done in the COVID era. It's looking like they'd have done roughly the exact same, IMO. And I doubt they'd have had the blanket help (e.g. the gas and electricity £66 that everyone got) I think help would lihave been entirely means-teasted.

And yet in Sunak's term the winter fuel was dished out plenty, he's actually looking better than Starmer right now.

Maybe it would have all changed if the Tories got in again,but the funny thing is we expect it from them ...but Labour were supposed to be the opposite ie helping the working class, pensioners , the poor etc .

[bots]

the problem with means testing, is that it automatically excludes some from applying, either through pride, or not wanting to share private details or they may simply miss it by not knowing their entitlement. This is particularly true for the elderly. It also adds significant overhead to both the time it takes to process a claim, and the cost of actually doing the means testing

[user104658]

And yet in Sunak's term the winter fuel was dished out plenty, he's actually looking better than Starmer right now.

Maybe it would have all changed if the Tories got in again,but the funny thing is we expect it from them ...but Labour were supposed to be the opposite ie helping the working class, pensioners , the poor etc .

Cutting winter fuel allowance to pensioners is a bizarre decision IMO I have no idea who signed off on that - I don't believe for a second the Tories just care so much about the elderly and that's why the Tories didn't do it... they didn't do it because it saves eff all money whilst being absolutely abysmal PR. I cannot fathom why they've done it. If it was saving billions, sure. But pinching pennies from the elderly, from something like staying warm in winter...? The optics of it are shocking. That's why the Tories didn't do it. The political cost MASSIVELY outweighs any saving on the budget.

[user104658]

the problem with means testing, is that it automatically excludes some from applying, either through pride, or not wanting to share private details or they may simply miss it by not knowing their entitlement. This is particularly true for the elderly. It also adds significant overhead to both the time it takes to process a claim, and the cost of actually doing the means testing

Tbf there are other ways to do it and I have heard noises from Labour about "other options" such as making the energy companies themselves more accountable. In theory, for example, you could make it that energy companies have to have a special tariff for households with only over-65's, offering rock bottom "at cost" unit prices (year round) and maybe build in a guarantee of no sudden rate hikes.

But we'll see.

[bots]

Cutting winter fuel allowance to pensioners is a bizarre decision IMO I have no idea who signed off on that - I don't believe for a second the Tories just care so much about the elderly and that's why the Tories didn't do it... they didn't do it because it saves eff all money whilst being absolutely abysmal PR. I cannot fathom why they've done it. If it was saving billions, sure. But pinching pennies from the elderly, from something like staying warm in winter...? The optics of it are shocking. That's why the Tories didn't do it. The political cost MASSIVELY outweighs any saving on the budget.

The tories get a lot of votes from OAP's :laugh: Maybe labour have decided to kill them off, thus improving their election hopes and reducing the pension bill

I would have said that was a ludicrous suggestion a few years ago, but now, i'm really not so sure

[Livia]

Rayner, assisting in assuring Labour is a one-term government.

[Cherie]

The tories get a lot of votes from OAP's :laugh: Maybe labour have decided to kill them off, thus improving their election hopes and reducing the pension bill

I would have said that was a ludicrous suggestion a few years ago, but now, i'm really not so sure

I think there is this thinking behind it I can't imagine why else they would implement that, that along with lowering the voting age to 16 should see them in power for at least 10 years, any pensioner earning over 12,500 has to submit a tax return so it would be pretty easy for HMRC to identify pensioners who earn say less than 30k a year, same as they did with means testing childbenefit, to tell a pensioner that they are well off because they have a small private pension that might garner them 4k a year is insane

[Cherie]

Tbf there are other ways to do it and I have heard noises from Labour about "other options" such as making the energy companies themselves more accountable. In theory, for example, you could make it that energy companies have to have a special tariff for households with only over-65's, offering rock bottom "at cost" unit prices (year round) and maybe build in a guarantee of no sudden rate hikes.

But we'll see.

Well that may be so, but it doesn't look like this will be implemented any time soon, and meanwhile it is getting chilly

[Cherie]

Rayner, assisting in assuring Labour is a one-term government.

Not if they managed to kill of a significant amount of voters during a cold snap

[Liam-]

Are we really suggesting Labour are trying to murder old people to stay in power? :joker:

[Livia]

Are we really suggesting Labour are trying to murder old people to stay in power? :joker:

Why do you think they're targeting some of the most vulnerable? Lots of elderly people have never claimed benefits and never will, so saying those on pension credit will be exempt is just noise.

[Cherie]

Are we really suggesting Labour are trying to murder old people to stay in power? :joker:

yes I am, I cant imagine why their first turn was to target all pensioners, can you give me a reason why they have done this?

[joeysteele]

Personally I wouldn't oppose this change.

It won't affect any pensioners on pension credit who if they get pension credit, the cost of their council tax bill is reduced by over 75% anyway at least.

It won't affect those on benefit either who get any council tax reduction.

However it may not be fair on those working who live alone who will lose this 25% reduction.
I do get that totally.
I mean, when Thatcher changed the old rates bands to the poll tax.
Where EVERY adult living in a property had to pay the full rates equally separately.

There was no reduction for living alone then I don't think.

The problem is once something is given, it's expected for good.
IF Labour do and they haven't yet, end this single occupancy deduction on council tax.
It isn't a good move but maybe not the wrong one.

I guess with this massive overall majority in place, it's a case of getting unsavoury and unpopular likely polices done very early on.
To restore or replace with better other ways later on in government as the years go on.

That's not new from governments.
The coalition one in 2020/11 brought in horrendously cruel polices especially towards the sick and disabled which I didn't hear many caring much about then.
Even as to that hateful bedroom tax to council accommodation tenants.

[Cherie]

Personally I wouldn't oppose this change.

It won't affect any pensioners on pension credit who if they get pension credit, the cost of their council tax bill is reduced by over 75% anyway at least.

It won't affect those on benefit either who get any council tax reduction.

However it may not be fair on those working who live alone who will lose this 25% reduction.
I do get that totally.
I mean, when Thatcher changed the old rates bands to the poll tax.
Where EVERY adult living in a property had to pay the full rates equally separately.

There was no reduction for living alone then I don't think.

The problem is once something is given, it's expected for good.
IF Labour do and they haven't yet, end this single occupancy deduction on council tax.
It isn't a good move but maybe not the wrong one.

I guess with this massive overall majority in place, it's a case of getting unsavoury and unpopular likely polices done very early on.
To restore or replace with better other ways later on in government as the years go on.

That's not new from governments.
The coalition one in 2020/11 brought in horrendously cruel polices especially towards the sick and disabled which I didn't hear many caring much about then.
Even as to that hateful bedroom tax to council accommodation tenants.

It would affect pensioners not on pension credit like the winter fuel thing though, as an example my aunt who is 89 has lost TV licence, Winter fuel and now possibly looks to have to pay an additional 450.00 not sure what her council tax band is but just going on band B so she would have to find an additional 800 plus the increase in fuel and food, and all because she did the right thing and paid into a private pension, what incentive is there for anyone to do the right thing I wonder if they are just going to penalise anyone with a bit more than the state pension, she is not a millionaire, she is lucky that she owns her property but if she ever needs to go into a home that will go obviously.....do the right thing ...and I dont blame Labour for this but the Tories as well, buy your home, save for your old age, put money by in a pension and then wallop we will have that thank you very much.:joker: I just heard some guy from the TUC with Shelia Fogerty now saying Rachel Reeves will set out support for pensioners not on pension credit in the budget so it looks like a U turn might be on the way, but why frighten people like this, its a mess

[joeysteele]

It would affect pensioners not on pension credit like the winter fuel thing though, as an example my aunt who is 89 has lost TV licence, Winter fuel and now possibly looks to have to pay an additional 450.00 not sure what her council tax band is but just going on band B so she would have to find an additional 800 plus the increase in fuel and food, and all because she did the right thing and paid into a private pension, what incentive is there for anyone to do the right thing I wonder if they are just going to penalise anyone with a bit more than the state pension, she is not a millionaire, she is lucky that she owns her property but if she ever needs to go into a home that will go obviously.....do the right thing ...and I dont blame Labour for this but the Tories as well, buy your home, save for your old age, put money by in a pension and then wallop we will have that thank you very much.:joker: I just heard some guy from the TUC with Shelia Fogerty now saying Rachel Reeves will set out support for pensioners not on pension credit in the budget so it looks like a U turn might be on the way, but why frighten people like this, its a mess



Oh I don't disagree with really all you've said there.

I'm really disappointed with my governing party right now
Although I do realise the scale of the mess they're left with.

Because of the debt level it leaves borrowing out more or less too.
The debt level that has reached terrible levels over the last 14 years.

However I do think the wrong choices are being made
I want to hear what comes from conference without the media's biased agenda's being presented.
Labour MPs and members are far from happy however I'd like to see what is the extra help.

However too, I was talking to a pensioner last week, who said she couldn't get pension credit.
I said are you sure can we explore that.
So brought up the pension credit details.
( The form is absolutely horrendous and ridiculously too long, no wonder people don't bother).

Anyway this pensioner has savings, a works pension, owned her home so we did the quick calculator for it.
Not asked for name and address just date of birth and gender.

It said on the information given she could get £2.76 a week pension credit.
She never believed she'd qualify.
So her claim is now in.

Having said that, I just have to though agree with you.
Pensioners and others are getting stressed and frightened.
That's not an overstatement it's a fact.
Which I am really mad about and disappointed in the government as to.

There must be easier, less stressful for the elderly and others as to ways of raising extra funding.
I think the hole in the finances is worse than was believed before the election.
The OBR has indicated the previous government didn't give them the full information in the last financial statement.
I do NOT though think it's as bad as Reeves has stated either.
I'm now not sure how I feel as to her really.

I hoped this government would listen and really listen, not just hear.
That doesn't at this moment seem the case at all.
I think she may and hope Reeves does have a tough time at conference.

I'm really disappointed in them thus far on these issues.
Not content at all.
So I agree with your post above.

[Livia]

You really are a nice chap joeysteele. That was.kind of you to help someone out like that...

[joeysteele]

You really are a nice chap joeysteele. That was.kind of you to help someone out like that...

Thank you Livia although I'm sure most would help if they could in that scenario.

I know even while likely most of the elderly now have some form of internet interest and use.
The minefield of officialdom and claiming or getting information on things across the board, can present difficulties and even stress for them.

What I find also unbelievable and despicable, from Reeves, is the admission that it's KNOWN there's at least 800,000 pensioners who SHOULD be claiming and getting pension credit but who are not.
At least 800.000 could really mean over a million.

So for me it's plain wrong to implement any policy of withdrawal of support, when you know everyone who should still be getting it, is not.
Until you know all who should be receiving it, WILL BE, then you should not be making changes to it.
That is disgraceful.

[Beso]

yes I am, I cant imagine why their first turn was to target all pensioners, can you give me a reason why they have done this?

A high tory voting demograph.:shrug:

We know how spiteful and baby like starmer is, its payback time in his head.

[Cherie]

Oh I don't disagree with really all you've said there.

I'm really disappointed with my governing party right now
Although I do realise the scale of the mess they're left with.

Because of the debt level it leaves borrowing out more or less too.
The debt level that has reached terrible levels over the last 14 years.

However I do think the wrong choices are being made
I want to hear what comes from conference without the media's biased agenda's being presented.
Labour MPs and members are far from happy however I'd like to see what is the extra help.

However too, I was talking to a pensioner last week, who said she couldn't get pension credit.
I said are you sure can we explore that.
So brought up the pension credit details.
( The form is absolutely horrendous and ridiculously too long, no wonder people don't bother).

Anyway this pensioner has savings, a works pension, owned her home so we did the quick calculator for it.
Not asked for name and address just date of birth and gender.

It said on the information given she could get £2.76 a week pension credit.
She never believed she'd qualify.
So her claim is now in.

Having said that, I just have to though agree with you.
Pensioners and others are getting stressed and frightened.
That's not an overstatement it's a fact.
Which I am really mad about and disappointed in the government as to.

There must be easier, less stressful for the elderly and others as to ways of raising extra funding.
I think the hole in the finances is worse than was believed before the election.
The OBR has indicated the previous government didn't give them the full information in the last financial statement.
I do NOT though think it's as bad as Reeves has stated either.
I'm now not sure how I feel as to her really.

I hoped this government would listen and really listen, not just hear.
That doesn't at this moment seem the case at all.
I think she may and hope Reeves does have a tough time at conference.

I'm really disappointed in them thus far on these issues.
Not content at all.
So I agree with your post above.

oh thats brilliant, I will look into it for my aunt, yeah I believe its like 240 questions or thereabouts thanks Joey

[Livia]

Thank you Livia although I'm sure most would help if they could in that scenario.

I know even while likely most of the elderly now have some form of internet interest and use.
The minefield of officialdom and claiming or getting information on things across the board, can present difficulties and even stress for them.

What I find also unbelievable and despicable, from Reeves, is the admission that it's KNOWN there's at least 800,000 pensioners who SHOULD be claiming and getting pension credit but who are not.
At least 800.000 could really mean over a million.

So for me it's plain wrong to implement any policy of withdrawal of support, when you know everyone who should still be getting it, is not.
Until you know all who should be receiving it, WILL BE, then you should not be making changes to it.
That is disgraceful.

My mother worked on computers before she retired and my Dad has a real interest, he's an avid Googler, but I know they're not the norm and lots of elderly people have no idea about them. It's good that there are people willing to help.

If they know how many people should be claiming they surely should be approaching them?

[joeysteele]

oh thats brilliant, I will look into it for my aunt, yeah I believe its like 240 questions or thereabouts thanks Joey

It's always worth checking Cherie.
I'd like to think you find a similar possible outcome for your Aunt

The quick anonymous calculator bit is easy.
Then if it can be claimed the chore of going through that obnoxiously horrendous long form is really ridiculous.

Good luck.

[joeysteele]

My mother worked on computers before she retired and my Dad has a real interest, he's an avid Googler, but I know they're not the norm and lots of elderly people have no idea about them. It's good that there are people willing to help.

If they know how many people should be claiming they surely should be approaching them?

Exactly.
Ms Reeves hasn't so far answered that question to anyone who has raised it.
Just keeps saying they are pushing pensioners to claim it who haven't yet.

Ignorance.

[Cherie]

Are we really suggesting Labour are trying to murder old people to stay in power? :joker:

Cutting access to winter fuel payments for pensioners will lead to 'excess deaths' this winter, Sir Keir Starmer has been warned by one of his own MPs.

Backbencher Rachael Maskell, who is leading a Labour revolt on plans to means test the benefit, has urged the PM and Chancellor Rachel Reeves to rethink the change.

In a newspaper article she warned that people will inevitably 'fall through the cracks' if the decision to limit the £300 payments to benefit recipients goes ahead.

Still laughing Liam?