Policy@Manchester Articles

Expert insight, analysis and comment on key public policy issues

  • All Posts
  • UK Politics
  • Energy and Environment
  • Growth and Inclusion
  • Health and Social Care
  • Urban
  • Science and Engineering
Policy@Manchester Articles: Whitehall Watch
You are here: Home / Whitehall Watch / Universal versus targeted benefits?

Universal versus targeted benefits?

Colin Talbot By Colin Talbot Filed Under: Whitehall Watch Posted: August 16, 2010

One idea to resolve the universal benefits versus targeted benefits issue, at least for the elderly, comes from an old friend Anne Bradford who has, to put it mildly, quite a lot financial experience in banking and as an adviser to people in hardship:

“The answer on Winter fuel Allowance seems blindingly obvious to me. Don’t means test it. Roll it up into the State OAP – which is taxed as earned income. Too many pensioners already don’t claim all their means tested rights. Plus it would cut out people who are still earning – sometimes big money.

Also roll up the £10 christmas bonus, the enhanced Winter fuel for older pensioners and (for over 75s) the money for a free TV licence. Much better than an extra 25p a week at 80.

It would save a lot of Admin costs, IT costs etc. The qualifying age would gradually rise. Yes, jobs would be lost in Civil service and TV licencing office – but a lot of jobs are going anyway. It would be a much more socialist move than the current system, so a positive. It also would consolidate it into the State Pension – so not be able to be removed.

I know the winter fuel and TV licence are per household while the OAP is per person. But the cost savings, taxation and streamlining might even allow for the OAP increase to be more than winter fuel.

I’m not being a partisan pensioner, as I would have to pay more tax at 20% on the inceased OAP – but would be comforted by the fact it is fairer and that some people would be paying 40%

Cuts seem inevitable. This cost saving would at least have a positive side.”

I’m not sure about this, it’s not my field of expertise and benefits are fiendishly complex, but it certainly appears on the face of it an idea worth examining. Any comments would be very welcome.

About Colin Talbot

Colin Talbot is a Professor of Government, a former Specialist Advisor to the House of Commons Treasury Select Committee and the Public Administration Select Committee and has appeared as expert witness many times in Parliament, the Scottish Parliament and NI Assembly. He's also advised Governments from the USA to Japan.

Our RSS feed

Receive our latest content and timely updates by subscribing to our RSS feed.

 Subscribe in your reader

More from this author

  • The UK after the Referendum: all that is solid melts into air…..
  • SR2015: £35bn on debt interest? But what about the £375bn held by the Bank of England?
  • SR2015: Spending: Is 36% of GDP still his target?

Become a contributor

Would you like to write for us on a public policy issue? Get in touch with a member of the team, ask for our editorial guidelines, or access our online training toolkit (UoM login required).

Disclaimer

Articles give the views of the author, and are not necessarily those of The University of Manchester.

Policy@Manchester

Manchester Policy Articles is an initiative from Policy@Manchester. Visit our web site to find out more

Contact Us

policy@manchester.ac.uk
t: +44 (0) 161 275 3038
The University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PL, UK

Copyright © 2025 · Policy Blog 2 on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in