Tories have to stop running scared of wealthy pensioners

Did he broadcast to social housing tenants with a spare bedroom the message that bigger families need the space – so could they find it in their hearts to downsize?

No again.

Those at the bottom of the ladder were told from on high that a spare room would cost them a reduction in benefit. The sick and disabled were told they must be re-assessed by more stringent (and sometimes inaccurate) testing.

Weren't they, and all those in receipt of benefit, as good as labelled scroungers?

They were in my view.

We heard a lot about decent, hard-working people rising early to earn their living, while next door the blinds were down and lazy, benefit-fiddling neighbours lay abed.

We heard about how the state can't any longer afford to pay child benefit to high earners and needs to cap all benefits at £26,000 a year.

So how come IDS is sweet-talking the section of society that is the biggest drain on the public purse? I'm talking about pensioners: the only age group that is ring-fenced from austerity.

The UK state pension bill in 2011-2012 was £74.22bn. That is 47% of the annual benefit spend. Yet all pensioners are entitled to perks. Compare that to the £12.57bn cost of the Disability Living Allowance in the same period.

Iain Duncan Smith found himself in the middle of a dust storm at the weekend when he was reported to have said he would encourage the wealthy among them to return their unwanted winter fuel allowance and free bus passes to the state.

He was rightly savaged. Everything about his statement was unacceptable.

If people do not need, want or deserve hand-outs, why is the Government distributing them? In fact, since the country's coffers are empty and debt is rampant, why isn't the Government abolishing them?

In the run-up to Christmas people over the age of 60 receive a tax-free lump sum of between £100 and £300 to assist with heating bills. They can apply for a bus pass to allow them to travel free of charge off peak. When they reach the age of 75 they no longer have to pay for a television licence and over the age of 80 more benefits accrue.

This is marvellous and civilised for those who need it. Isn't it sheer profligacy to force it upon those who don't?

As with every generation, pensioners come in all income brackets. Some are really hard up. Most are probably just getting by and glad of a bit of help. Quite a few are comfortable. But some are millionaires, others multi-millionaires. And all get the same perks.

It's not just wrong. It's ridiculous. Isn't need the basis of our welfare system? Isn't ability to pay the basis of our tax system?

It was this rich group that Iain Duncan-Smith was suggesting (so gently and so politely) might like to return the money to the state. He waved no big stick. He made no assertions as to their moral bankruptcy in taking what they patently don't need. He didn't label them scroungers.

In fact yesterday he went on the Today programme to retract even the suggestion that the money be returned. He thinks universal benefits for the elderly are correct. People have a right to the money and they must do with it as they wish.

It's called the lesson of Nick Clegg.

Before the last General Election Nick Clegg made a song and dance about guaranteeing free university tuition for students. Once in the Coalition he did a volte face. He has never been forgiven. Chances are he will never be forgiven.

Before the last election David Cameron pledged to safeguard pensioner benefits-.. You can fill in the blanks.

It's not that the Tories are dewy-eyed about the comforts of the old. It's that they are clear-eyed about the survival of their vote, and pensioners are too important to anger (unlike other groups in receipt of benefits).

That's why they resist Mr Clegg's call to means-test pensioners. That's why they are blind to what Vince Cable describes as "a deep anomaly".

So the upshot is that these benefits aren't even taxed. (That would at least claw back a percentage on a sliding scale according to income).

Imagine how this kid-glove treatment is heard in households that are suffering. The following post was put up yesterday on a website for motor neurone disease sufferers. It speaks for itself: "What in the world is happening, does anyone in the Government understand what MND is? I was diagnosed in November 2012 and since then I have lost the power of speech, can't swallow food, can't walk, my muscles have been eaten away by this horrible disease. I am fed through a tube inserted in my tummy, I choke with mucus in my throat, I need a special breathing machine to help me breath at night, and sometimes during the day, I am in a wheelchair now, but the worst thing is what it has done to my family.

"They are in bits, my poor wife is my carer and it is a 24-hour seven days a week job, she never moans she just gets on with it, we have our wee cries and cuddles and we even laugh sometimes, you have to. And for someone to ask someone with MND to be tested to see if they are fit for work, or to ask them to pay for a bedroom that is not being used is disgusting, and I can tell you right now there is no way I will be going to be tested, if they want they will have to come to me."

Even the affluent recipients of pensioner benefits can see the injustice. Some don't claim their bus pass or ever use it. Some donate the money to charity. Others, according to Mr Duncan Smith, already voluntarily return it to the state.

It's farcical. At a time of increasing stringency for everyone and real hardship for some, the Government shouldn't penalise the poor while cushioning the wealthy – no matter what age the wealthy have reached. After all, we are all in this together aren't we?

None of us likes a politician who goes back on his word. But neither do we like a Prime Minister who puts party interest before national interest. And that's what this protection of universal benefit for pensioners looks suspiciously like.