Division · No. 15Tuesday, 10 September 2024Commons Welfare and Benefits

Opposition day: Winter Fuel Payment

214
Ayes
335
Noes
Defeated · Government won
97 did not vote
Analysis
Commons

**What happened:** On 10 September 2024, MPs voted on an opposition day motion calling on the government to reverse its decision to restrict winter fuel payments and restore universal eligibility for pensioners. The motion was defeated by 335 votes to 214. An opposition day motion is a non-binding debate chosen by the opposition party rather than the government, though it carries political and symbolic weight as a public test of parliamentary opinion. **Why it matters:** The vote concerns the government's decision to means-test the winter fuel payment, a benefit worth up to £300 per year that had previously been paid to nearly all pensioners regardless of income. Under the new policy, eligibility is restricted to those receiving pension credit or certain other means-tested benefits, removing the payment from around ten million pensioners. Critics argue many vulnerable elderly people who do not claim pension credit despite being entitled to it will lose support they depend on to heat their homes through winter. Supporters of the change argue it targets limited public funds at those who need them most. **The politics:** The vote divided almost entirely along government versus opposition lines. All 334 Labour and Labour and Co-operative MPs who voted opposed the motion, while the Conservatives, Liberal Democrats, SNP, Reform UK, the DUP, Plaid Cymru, and the Greens all voted in favour of restoring universal payments. Eight independents voted for the motion and three against. There were no Labour rebels. The issue sits within a broader political argument about the new Labour government's fiscal inheritance and its early spending decisions, with the winter fuel change becoming one of the most politically contested choices of Labour's opening months in office. On the same day, a separate but related vote on a motion to annul the statutory instrument implementing the cut was also defeated, by 348 votes to 228.

Voting Aye meant
Support reversing the cuts to Winter Fuel Payment so all pensioners continue to receive it, not just those on Pension Credit
Voting No meant
Back the Labour government's decision to restrict Winter Fuel Payment to the poorest pensioners on Pension Credit, citing the need to address a fiscal deficit
§ 01Who voted how.549 voting members · 97 absent
Aye215No337DID NOT VOTE · 97

549 voting MPs. Each dot is one vote; left-to-right by party. Grey dots in the centre are the 97 who did not vote.

Aye
No
Absent
Labour PartyWhipped No
0
296
66
Conservative and Unionist PartyWhipped Aye
108
0
8
Liberal DemocratsWhipped Aye
69
0
3
Labour and Co-operative PartyWhipped No
0
38
4
Independent
8
3
3
Scottish National PartyWhipped Aye
9
0
Reform UKWhipped Aye
5
0
2
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
0
0
2
Alliance Party of Northern Ireland
1
0
Speaker
0
0
1
Traditional Unionist Voice
1
0
Ulster Unionist Party
1
0
Your Party
0
0
1
§ 02From the debate.8 principal speakers
Sir Mel StrideOpposedCentral Devon
Opposes the winter fuel payment cuts as rushed policy lacking proper scrutiny, impact assessments, and adequate notice to pensioners; argues the urgency is politically motivated to avoid blame.Conservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (1,779 words)
James MurraySupportiveEaling North
Defends means-testing winter fuel payments as necessary fiscal responsibility given the £22 billion in-year black hole; emphasizes protecting those most in need via pension credit while maintaining triple lock increases.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (2,900 words)
Sarah OlneyOpposedRichmond Park
Acknowledges fiscal challenges but opposes the cuts as causing suffering to vulnerable pensioners; calls for alternative policies including energy upgrades and windfall taxes rather than removing support.Liberal Democrat · Voted aye · Read full speech (1,416 words)
Sir Roger GaleOpposedHerne Bay and Sandwich
Supports means-testing in principle but condemns the manner and speed of implementation as cruel and likely to cause deaths; holds the Chancellor and PM directly responsible.Conservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (771 words)
Priti PatelOpposedWitham
Attacks the cuts as ideological and driven by union payoffs; demands transparency through impact assessments and clear answers on NHS costs and household support fund funding.Conservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (616 words)
Sam RushworthSupportiveBishop Auckland
Voted with Government, arguing means-testing is justified given state pension rises and that many concerned pensioners could claim pension credit; supports broader economic stabilization efforts.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (767 words)
Jim ShannonOpposedStrangford
Opposes the cuts as balancing the books on pensioners' backs; proposes alternatives like household caps or opt-out schemes; emphasizes Northern Ireland's particular fuel poverty challenges.DUP · Voted aye · Read full speech (782 words)
Wendy MortonOpposedAldridge-Brownhills
Strongly opposes the cuts as a callous political choice affecting low-income pensioners; notes pension credit uptake is complicated and insufficient as a solution.Conservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (749 words)
§ 03Related divisions.Same topic · recent
Sources
Division dataUK Parliament Votes API
DebateHansard · Commons
Stance analysisAI analysis · Claude 4.x
LicenceOpen Parliament Licence v3.0