Pension Age Winter Heating Payment: Business and Regulatory Impact Assessment (BRIA)

Consultation

20. Prior to the UK Government decision to restrict eligibility of WFP, we consulted on our policy proposals for PAWHP as a universal payment. The purpose of the consultation and associated stakeholder engagement was to gather views on the proposed like-for-like delivery of winter fuel payments, considering eligibility criteria, payment format, to collect additional evidence for those who will receive PAWHP and who are off-gas grid and to identify any unintended consequences of introducing the new payment including the impact of the new benefit on businesses and key stakeholders.

21. Given the manner of the UK government’s announcement, with no prior consultation, and urgency in laying of these regulations, to ensure payments are made to pensioners in Scotland this winter, it has not been possible to consult further on the revised policy.

22. There was broad support for maintaining the universal approach to eligibility for all who have reached state pension age, with 80% of all respondents in favour of this approach. However, some stakeholders disagreed, with five organisations calling for the benefit to be targeted more effectively at those in fuel poverty. This was on the basis that any savings could provide additional funding to support other fuel poverty initiatives.

23. During our public consultation on PAWHP, some individuals commented on the potential impact on energy companies. Some people recognised energy companies could benefit as a result of PAWHP as people are likely to be able to pay their bills on time, stating that otherwise these businesses may lose out due to non-payment.

Social Security Experience Panels Survey

24. We also invited members of our Social Security Experience Panels for their views on the key policy considerations for this new benefit alongside the public consultation.

25. Many suggested PAWHP should be provided for people with disabilities, extending coverage through lowering the eligible age for those with disabilities and, for those who are unable to work due to a disability. Some also suggested a universal payment without age limits.

26. Slightly more agreed (41%) than disagreed (34%), that the value of payments was appropriate. However, some suggested island communities should receive a higher value payment to reflect the higher heating costs and weather conditions costs incurred with island or rural life, and widening eligibility to cover all households that were off-gas grid, including disabled or vulnerable households, or assessing cases on an individual basis.

27. Almost all (91%) survey respondents agreed that PAWHP should continue to be provided as a one-off payment each winter. Those in support stated it would help with advance planning for the winter months and would help with budgeting decisions over the Christmas period.