Rachel Reeves' cruel Winter Fuel Payments argument crumbled at this exact moment

Plain speaking Tory Edward Leigh spoke for many when he branded winter fuel cuts a “punishment beating”.

Pensioners have been repeatedly told that “difficult decisions” must be taken to balance the books after 14 years of the Conservatives in power.

But over 90 minutes of fractious debate the hollowness of the government’s argument was well and truly laid bare.

There was no convincing explanation as to why train drivers on an average salary of £60,000 a year were not victims of those “difficult decisions”.

A 14% pay rise was signed off by ministers and they did not even extract one change in working practices to the antiquated set up the unions continue to protect.

Shadow work and pensions secretary Mel Stride challenged the Labour benches to put their hands up if they have not received money from the trade unions.

Only one tentatively appeared to raise a palm.

A number of Labour MPs got up to speak in support of the government, including veteran Meg Hillier and newly elected Anna Dixon.

But many of Keir Starmer's backbenchers are deeply unhappy at what is happening.

In another debate earlier in the day held in Westminster Hall, the Commons’ second chamber, Labour’s Rachel Maskell, said she felt “sick to the stomach” when looking about the number of deaths linked to cold weather.

Pensions Minister Emma Reynolds defended the cuts and said there are “plenty of very wealthy pensioners” who do not need the winter fuel payment.

But the public will never forget if there are deaths linked to the changes in the coming months.