Social Fund Winter Fuel Payment Regulations 2024 (SI, 2024, No. 869): motion to annul
228
Ayes
—
348
Noes
Defeated · Government won
70 did not vote
Analysis
Commons
Commons
Parliament voted on 10 September 2024 on a motion to annul (cancel) the Social Fund Winter Fuel Payment Regulations 2024, which had removed winter fuel payments from the majority of pensioners by restricting eligibility to those receiving Pension Credit or certain other means-tested benefits. The motion was defeated by 348 votes to 228, meaning the government's regulations remained in force and the cuts to winter fuel payments stood. The vote has significant practical consequences for millions of older people in England and Wales. Before the regulations came into effect, winter fuel payments of between 200 and 300 pounds were paid universally to people aged 66 and over, regardless of income. The new regulations tied eligibility to Pension Credit, a benefit claimed by roughly 1.4 million pensioners, meaning the majority of the approximately 11 million pensioners previously eligible lost access to the payment. Critics argued this would leave many pensioners, particularly those just above the Pension Credit threshold, struggling to heat their homes in winter. The vote divided almost entirely along government versus opposition lines. Labour MPs voted overwhelmingly to maintain the cuts, with only five Labour members voting against their own government. Every Conservative, Liberal Democrat, SNP, Reform UK, Green, Plaid Cymru, and DUP member who voted did so in favour of annulment. The vote took place alongside a related opposition day debate on the same subject, in which a separate motion was also defeated 335 to 214. The controversy over winter fuel payments became one of the first major domestic political flashpoints for the new Labour government, elected in July 2024, with sustained media coverage and cross-party criticism focused on the speed and scale of the decision.
Voting Aye meant
Support annulling the regulations, opposing the removal of universal Winter Fuel Payments and protecting pensioner income support
Voting No meant
Oppose annulling the regulations, backing the government's decision to means-test Winter Fuel Payments to target support at the poorest pensioners
576 voting MPs. Each dot is one vote; left-to-right by party. Grey dots in the centre are the 70 who did not vote.
Aye
No
Absent
Labour PartyWhipped No
5
307
50
Conservative and Unionist PartyWhipped Aye
111
0
5
Liberal DemocratsWhipped Aye
72
0
—
Labour and Co-operative PartyWhipped No
0
39
3
Independent
8
3
3
Scottish National PartyWhipped Aye
9
0
—
Reform UKWhipped Aye
6
0
1
Sinn Féin
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist PartyWhipped Aye
5
0
—
Green Party of England and WalesWhipped Aye
4
0
—
Plaid CymruWhipped Aye
4
0
—
Social Democratic and Labour Party
2
0
—
Alliance Party of Northern Ireland
1
0
—
Speaker
0
0
1
Traditional Unionist Voice
1
0
—
Ulster Unionist Party
1
0
—
Your Party
1
0
—
Means-testing the winter fuel payment breaks Labour's election promises and will harm 2/3 of pensioners in poverty; the policy is rushed, lacks impact assessments, and represents broken commitments to integrity and transparency.Conservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (1,632 words) →
The government inherited a dire financial position with deferred spending commitments; difficult decisions are necessary; the triple lock provides overall pension support and pension credit must be promoted to reach the poorest 880,000 unclaimed pensioners.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (2,284 words) →
The £22 billion black hole is an accounting device; the government should have had a serious debate about pensions rather than a 'punishment beating' on pensioners just above the pension credit threshold, many of whom worked hard and have modest savings.Conservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (869 words) →
The cut is wrong; it strips support from the poorest pensioners as energy bills rise; the government has not properly thought through compensatory measures or pension credit uptake barriers; cliff edges create cruelty for those just over the threshold.Liberal Democrat · Voted aye · Read full speech (1,584 words) →
The policy will cause excess winter deaths among vulnerable elderly because cold has direct physiological harms; the absence of an impact assessment suggests the government knows the lethal consequences but proceeded anyway.Conservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (550 words) →
The policy causes unacceptable harm to vulnerable pensioners; the 243-question pension credit form and 9-week processing time will not protect those struggling; the government must delay and pursue mitigation, though she cannot vote against her party.Labour · Voted no_vote_recorded · Read full speech (587 words) →
The government must fix public finances through difficult choices; winter fuel payments should be means-tested to those in greatest need; the triple lock supports all pensioners, pension credit uptake must increase via expanded campaigns and data-sharing, and warm homes investment provides long-term solutions.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (2,031 words) →
The burden should fall on those with broadest shoulders, not the poorest; the policy contradicts Labour values on inequality; pensioners ineligible for pension credit face real hardship in cold homes; redistribution via tax measures would be a better approach.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (680 words) →
Sources
Division dataUK Parliament Votes API
DebateHansard · Commons
Stance analysisAI analysis · Claude 4.x
LicenceOpen Parliament Licence v3.0