'We are outraged': Angry Scottish pensioner couple take legal action over winter fuel payment cut

A pair of Scottish pensioners have taken legal action over the axing of the winter fuel payment as John Swinney’s Government was accused of “meekly accepting” the decision to means test the benefit.

Peter and Florence Fanning, aged 73 and 72, will no longer receive their £300 allowance this winter after both governments decided to cut the payments for all but those in receipt of pension credit.

The couple from Coatbridge in North Lanarkshire have raised proceedings with the help of the Govan Law Centre against the Scottish Government and UK work and pensions secretary Liz Kendall over the policy.

But Mr Swinney defended his Government’s decision to follow its UK counterpart in making the cut, with the First Minister saying it had been “necessary and appropriate, given our legal obligations, to live within our resources”.

Mr Fanning said he was “outraged” at the decision. The pair pay around £1,700 a year for gas and electricity in their Coatbridge home and say they will be forced to stay in their bed to keep warm over the colder months.

Peter and Florence Fanning, of Coatbridge, North Lanarkshire, speaking at a press conference in Edinburgh. Picture: Craig Paton/PA Wire | PA

Govan Law Centre on Thursday raised a judicial review in the Court of Session on behalf of Mr and Mrs Fanning. The firm has applied for legal aid to help cover the case, saying it believed the governments did not comply with the Equality Act 2010 when making the cut.

The case’s argument rests on the accusation both governments failed to adequately consult with those of pension age on the change and did not release an equality impact assessment on the changes.

A Freedom of Information request revealed an abridged version of such an assessment had been carried out by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), with the UK government arguing a full study was not required.

Mr Fanning, who suffers from anaemia and asthma, said he was worried about his finances after having to dip into his savings to cover his heating bills last winter.

He said: “Florence doesn't have a pension, just the state pension. I had to spend my savings on keeping the heating on. My anaemia means my blood doesn’t circulate properly, so if I am cold and I try to stand up, the blood doesn’t reach my head right. There’s a knock-on effect to this.

“The best thing for me if I can’t keep my house warm is to get my bed socks on, get a hot water bottle and go to bed. If the governments think that is the ideal situation for a pensioner, then I’m sorry - I disbelieve you.”

Demonstrators gather outside the Scottish Parliament to mark UN International Day of Older Persons 2024 as they protest against the winter fuel payment cut. Picture: Jeff J Mitchell/Getty Images | Getty Images

Mr Fanning said the NHS would also be left in “real danger” this winter as the fuel payment cut could lead to more pensioners ending up in hospital with illnesses such as pneumonia, flu and coronavirus.

Rachel Moon, a partner at the Govan Law Centre, said: “We believe there’s good grounds to challenge the decisions taken by the UK and Scottish governments. The Equality Act 2010 makes clear there are steps to be undertaken when forming any policy and the risk and impact must be assessed.

“They failed to carry out an equality impact assessment and failed to carry out a consultation - quite simply, they should have considered this rigorously and it appears they did not do so.”

The Steamie newsletter will bring you the best analysis of Scottish politics - join those in the know and sign up now

Mr Fanning said: “We are angry that pensioners should be the first recourse for cutbacks. We are outraged that the health of many people will be jeopardised by the unexpected withdrawal of this money and a further 10 per cent rise in energy bills this winter.

“We are well aware of how tough things are for many households who have to count every single penny. The fact these decisions are being made by politicians who will never have to worry about turning on their own heating makes matters even worse.”

Demonstrators gather outside the Scottish Parliament to mark UN International Day of Older Persons 2024 as they protest against the winter fuel payment cut. Picture: Jeff J Mitchell/Getty Images | Getty Images

Chancellor Rachel Reeves announced after Labour’s general election win that winter fuel payments would be means tested in a bid to plug a £22 billion black hole in public finances.

For the first time ever this benefit is being devolved to Holyrood, and at the time Scottish ministers said they wanted to keep the payment universal. However, they later said due to £160 million being cut from the funding they would receive from the UK government, the benefit would also be means tested north of the Border.

The UK-wide cut has sparked a massive backlash, with Labour members voting at the party conference in Liverpool on Wednesday against the decision to cut the benefit in an embarrassing result for Sir Keir Starmer. This vote is non-binding and will therefore not change the UK government’s policy, but puts pressure on Labour ministers.

Former first minister Alex Salmond said there were some within the SNP who agreed with him and thought the Scottish Government should have been the ones to take action.

Former first minister Alex Salmond.

He said: “The Scottish Government, instead of meekly accepting this, should have challenged it and stood up for pensioners as opposed to meekly towing the line that was coming from Westminster.

“Win or lose, this is a battle well worth having, because it is about justice, holding governments to account, and what is right and proper.”

He also suggested the reason the Labour government did not carry out an impact assessment on the cut was because a previous study published in 2017 had suggested the move would lead to 4,000 excess deaths.

Mr Salmond said it costed around 40 per cent more to heat a home in Scotland compared to in London, meaning there would be a “more substantial” impact on Scottish pensioners.

Mr Swinney said: “The hard reality that I have to face is that has been removed abruptly from our budget and we have to take action to live within the financial resources available to me. Because on the question of the law, I am bound by law to balance the budget and to live within the means available to the Government.”

Asked if the Scottish Government had failed in its legal duty, Mr Swinney said: “I think the Government has taken the action that has been necessary and appropriate, given our legal obligations, to live within our resources, but obviously these are issues that are now the subject of consideration by the courts and we will, of course, engage in that process.”

A UK government spokeswoman said: “We are committed to supporting pensioners, with millions set to see their full new state pension rise by £1,700 this Parliament through our commitment to the triple lock.

“Given the dire state of the public finances we have inherited, it’s right we target support to those who need it most.”

Meanwhile Conservative MSP Jeremy Balfour had tried to amend the Social Security Bill, which is going through the Scottish Parliament, to create a winter heating assistance benefit for disabled pensioners.

Jeremy Balfour MSP

This would be similar to what is already in place for disabled children. However, the amendment was voted down as the SNP MSPs on the committee voted against it, and the Labour MSPs abstained.

Mr Balfour said: “Labour have once again shown they are simply not willing to support vulnerable pensioners. By abstaining on plans to deliver a winter heating assistance benefit, their MSPs on this committee have compounded the shocking decision to cut winter fuel payments for 900,000 Scottish pensioners.

“My proposal would have put much-needed money into the pockets of disabled pensioners during the most difficult times of the year.”