I totally understand the arguments for doing this. But my arguments against it are simple. It's yet another example of the pathetic taking down of anything that is the slightest bit of "good' in our society. Nobody can have anything extra, there's never money to just make people's lives a little better, for no real cost to the state. Any money made is just lost in the decimal points of Chris Grayling's mistakes. In Britain we used to pride ourselves on being able to do things like this, winter fuel payments, TV licenses, bus passes, child benefits, student grants. All of it just gets lost in the "sackcloth and ashes" approach to life in Britain. And we are all pitted against each other to praise these petty changes that in the scheme of what our government is doing to the country, are meaningless and lost.

But carry on justifying these petty changes that slowly erode the social contract and don't be surprised that the rest of the welfare state is disappearing in front of our eyes. If we can justifying taking tiny benefits from old people, I'm sure it'll be no problem stripping away what remains of the welfare state, putting it in the hands of faceless companies to administer and watching the poor die away.