'Labour will live to regret mean Winter Fuel Payment decision - it's bad politics that is backfiring,' says Sir John Redwood

Belatedly they are defining the change they want. It emerges they want to be greener and nastier than the Conservatives they replaced.

Taking pensioners' fuel grant away should reduce the amount of gas they can afford to burn, so it ticks the green box.

According to Labour in opposition, it will cause more premature winter deaths and suffering, so it clearly ticks the nasty box. Conservatives always pledged to carry on paying it, and pay it to the end they did.

It is strange that a government elected with a landslide majority on a very low vote should be so reckless with its limited popularity.

It could have had good will from many more of us if it had kept to its promises and rejected such a stupid cut as winter fuel.

In a desperate bid to look more caring, Ministers are trying to get more low income pensioners to apply for Pension Credit. They think there could be 800,000.

If they all applied and were granted the benefit, the extra cost would more than wipe out the savings from axing the fuel payment.

It would still also leave many low income pensioners struggling just above the cut off line for Pensioner Credit. What a mess - it could be dearer for taxpayers and worse for many. The form for Pensioner Credit is intimidating, and many pensioners do not want to go through that process but are happy with a universal benefit.

If Labour wants a fair reform then they could have announced the winter fuel grant would be withdrawn from the minority of pensioners paying higher rates of income tax, or they could have made the benefit taxable for higher rate payers.

The truth is this mean proposal was never going to save much money when you allowed for the other measures you need to help those who would otherwise go cold this winter. It was always going to be unpopular.

52 Labour MPs did not vote for it and one voted against. In the past, Conservatives were often accused falsely by Labour of wanting to make this cut. They pressed against it in debate and forced it to a vote.

Few voters wanted a greener government if it meant dearer fuel and more bans and lectures on how we should live.

This doesn't stop the government as it makes its mad dash to close down swathes of our industry, to prevent us getting out our own oil and gas and driving us to import dependence in so many areas.

This is the way to fewer jobs and lower living standards, to no growth and too little tax revenue.

All these policies are harmful, but the most unpopular is the withdrawal of fuel help.

Why hit the pensioners? Why cut the incomes they have to spend when you want growth? Why do they want them to be cold?

MORE FROM GBN MEMBERSHIP:

• Inheritance tax is here to stay and it will only get worse, says expert
  
• 'Attack on pensioners is just the start - and your inheritance is likely to be next'
• 'Watch out pensioners - an attack on pension savings could be looming,' says John Redwood

The government will live to regret this mean decision.

Its refusal to tell us how they have made up the number of a £ 22billion black hole in the state budget will lose them more support as angry pensioners tell their families to query the arithmetic.

It all looks like a bit of bad politics that is backfiring. Where is the promised openness? How does a maximum cut of £1.3billion to benefits sort things out?

After all, the government - without explaining how to pay for it - splashes out £10billion on pay awards for people a lot better off than many pensioners. So they must think they have more money than they are letting on or they have dire plans for the rest of us as they wield their axe again.

Maybe they haven't finished with the elderly let. There are rumours they will follow up their assault with new taxes on savings and pensions to make paying to keep warm even more difficult.