Couple challenges fuel payment cut in Coatbridge court
- Peter and Florence Fanning have been allowed to legally challenge the cut to the universal winter fuel payment for pensioners.
- They claim both UK and Scottish governments did not adequately consult with pensioners and failed to release an equality impact assessment.
- The upcoming court ruling could potentially restore the winter fuel payment, highlighting the need for accountability in government policies affecting vulnerable populations.
In the UK, a couple from Coatbridge, Peter and Florence Fanning, have been granted permission to challenge the reduction of the universal winter fuel payment for pensioners in court. They argue that the Scottish and UK governments failed to properly consult with pensioners before implementing these changes. The judicial review, backed by Lady Hood's approval, will address the legality of the decision to cut the payment, which is to take place in procedural hearings scheduled for December 4 and a substantive hearing on January 15. The new policy will restrict the winter fuel payment exclusively to those receiving pension credit or other means-tested benefits, contrasting with the previous universally available support. This decision follows a fiscal strategy from the Labour government that cites financial difficulties inherited from its predecessor. The Scottish government has also indicated a likely significant funding impact of these changes. Despite the contentious policy shift, the Scottish administration maintains that over one million pensioners will continue to receive assistance through means-tested programs. The case reflects broader concerns about government accountability and the treatment of vulnerable populations such as pensioners amid budget constraints, with implications for socio-economic rights and welfare support.