A Labour-led council has voted unanimously to call on the government to reverse controversial winter fuel payment changes which will affect millions of pensioners.

Stockton Council voted through the Conservative motion after a debate in which Tory members branded scrapping universal winter fuel allowance (WFA) “cruel and callous”. Labour and independent councillors said they disagreed, had concerns or found fault with the policy change, arguing reforms were necessary but needed to be targeted.

Councillor Tony Riordan, leader of the Conservative group in Stockton, said: “The decision to means-test winter fuel payments, especially with such short notice and without adequate compensatory measures, is deeply unfair and will disproportionately affect the health and well-being of our poorest older residents.”

He said restricting the £200 to £300 payments to people claiming pension credits and other benefits would worsen financial hardship for vulnerable pensioners who “desperately need” the support which prevented “heat or eat dilemmas” and protected their health. He added the change would affect more than 30,000 pensioners in Stockton, out of ten million nationwide, and push thousands into fuel poverty with the rise of the energy price cap.

He put forward the motion to instruct council leader and Labour group leader Cllr Bob Cook to write to Chancellor Rachel Reeves calling for the policy to be reversed and write to MPs asking for their support, and for all group leaders to sign a joint letter to the Chancellor.

Conservatives scorned the Labour government’s policy. Cllr Stephen Richardson described it as a crass and unforgivable decision to “deliberately hurt our pensioners” and cause distress and anxiety, while Cllr Elsi Hampton accused the “shambolic and disastrous” government of feudalism, “treachery and staggering hypocrisy”, saying people had been left to face a winter without support by a political decision which “shames our country”.

Cllr Marcus Vickers said it was a “cruel and callous political decision to inflict hurt on some of our most vulnerable”, with a lack of detail on the £22bn financial black hole used to justify it, and no published assessment of the changes’ impact. He referred to high winter death rates, saying: “More older people will die in this borough because of the decision by this Labour government.”

Cllr Carol Clark said: “The ink had barely dried on the Labour landslide headlines when this Labour government demonstrated eye-watering levels of insincerity with this cynical and spiteful move. We cannot stand by while Keir Starmer and his out-of-touch cronies treat people with such contempt and disrespect.”

Cllr John Coulson said: “Starmer and his Labour followers promised our pensioners they would keep them warm, they would care for them, they would change things for the better as long as they voted for them. Some of our pensioners did vote, and they have been conned like millions of other pensioners in the country by a party that hasn’t changed.”

Cllr Lynn Hall said: “The impact of this government measure I feel would be severe. Our proud pensioners pride themselves on managing their budgets.

“This winter will test them with no opportunity to prepare. We must protect and protest our pensioners.”

Cllr Niall Innes said: “By doing anything other than supporting this motion, it’s trying to defend the indefensible. Taking £300 which is a lifeline to vulnerable pensioners who are coming into winter… is morally and utterly wrong.”

Labour councillors criticised the policy too, but said the payment should not go to millionaires, Lords or people who did not need it. Cllr Barry Woodhouse accused the Conservatives of “gross hypocrisy”, listing costly controversies from PPE, Test & Trace, “crony contracts”, fraudulent furlough, Rwanda and HS2 to the Post Office and infected blood scandals, prompting calls of irrelevance from his opponents.

He said: “I’m highlighting the reasons why this was necessary. This Labour government is intent on putting right the wrongs of the last 14 years.”

Cllr Jim Beall said: “We all feel there’s something wrong about it. There’s a number of solutions that could be found to fill that gap in the budget, not least a wealth tax so that the burden falls on those with wider shoulders.”

Cllr Eileen Johnson said: “I don’t agree with what this government’s done. But something has to be done, and I don’t think a universal winter fuel allowance is financially sound for the future. The pension credit limit in my opinion is too low.

“Not all pensioners are in need. I’ve just got back from holiday in Crete and I was surrounded by British pensioners having a whale of a time. I think what we should do is target this, get it to the people who need it and stop the hyperbole.

“I get the winter fuel allowance. I spend it on my grandchildren’s Christmas presents. I don’t need it.”

Cllr Sylvia Walmsley, leader of the Thornaby Independent Association group, said: “I’m really disappointed that this has turned into a political football. All of us really agree that what’s been done is downright cruel.

“There’s no one denying it needs reform. It does get paid to too many people who don’t need it, but the way it’s been introduced is cruel, right at the onset of the cold nights, the rise of the energy cap and the proposed price rises, denies the opportunity for pensioners to budget for the forthcoming changes.

“We acknowledge that there’s holes left by the previous administration. But this measure hurts those most in need, and it should have been targeted.”

Fellow TIA member Cllr Ray Godwin said the blanket cut-off was wrong: “Everyone can see that the public finances and services were left in crisis, but people voted for change and fairer society. Hopefully if enough councillors and politicians speak out, then this poor decision can be revisited while a fairer tax system to fund our broken services is implemented.”

Independent Cllr Ted Strike said it was a rushed policy and people were “going to suffer starting now”. He said: “There are a lot of people who are going to miss out because of a very ill-thought-out and poor decision by the Chancellor of the Exchequer.”

He urged everyone to support the motion, “even if it does stick in your craw politically. Support your pensioners and let the Chancellor know that Stockton Borough Council to a man and a woman disagree with what they’ve done.”

Cllr Ross Patterson, deputy leader of the Ingleby Barwick Independent Society group, said: “I think the government’s gone the wrong way about this. I think the Labour government have overstepped the mark, they’ve gone too far. The whole system needs revision.”

Labour member Cllr Paul Rowling put forward an amendment to the motion. This would be to a similar letter to call on the government to reverse the policy for 2024-5, reconsider the options, develop a revised “fair to all” income-based scheme gradually reducing WFA, and to bring a fully costed scheme to Parliament in the 2025 Budget.

He said: “Clearly members across the chamber of all colours have concerns about the cut-off of this policy. But also it’s clearly not fair that people like millionaires and billionaires also receive it.”

Cllr Riordan argued the Labour amendment would negate his original motion, “a simple motion to reverse the government’s policy”. The amendment was rejected by the chair, mayor Cllr John Gardner, following legal advice.

All councillors eventually voted in favour of Cllr Riordan’s original motion.