To think that with over 1million pensioners in poverty, removing the WFA makes Labour the nasty party, who tell blatant lies?

[TealTraybake]

And hypocritical lies at that. Just a few months ago Labour ‘vowed to be the party for pensioners’

‘Nearly 1 million people aged over 66 in the UK are living in deprivation, according to government statistics, the highest number since comparable records began.
Labour, which analysed figures from Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) records, has vowed to be the party for pensioners, with plans to insulate millions of homes and reduce energy bills. It has also “committed to retaining” the triple lock which guarantees annual rises to the state pension’

I understand the WFA should be means tested - but the current threshold is far too low. Food prices have gone up. Energy prices have gone up. Some pensioners need that WFA 🥺.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2024/apr/16/nearly-1m-uk-pensioners-deprivation-official-figures

Quite.

I don't think means testing WFA is an easy feat at all, not least because many pensioners aren't doing tax returns etc (I don't think).

It seems to me the only feasible options are 1) take it off all pensioners (poorest suffer); 2) take it off no-one (cut somewhere else and someone else suffers); 3) use pension credit as cut off (poorest protected some just over the threshold will suffer) 4) define a different cut off (need to implement a new process which will be ££ and maybe more than they save).

If I'm right then I agree 3 is the least worst option. Especially when state pension has increased by more than the WFA this year due to the triple lock.

I’d go with 4. Cut it off at the same level as the income tax threshold. Easy and zero cost.

That (4) is the fairest version in my view too. You receive WFA until your income hits the tax threshold. Easy enough to keep up to date too.

Me too.

As for all the nonsense that you have to be a 'proper' socialist to run the Labour Party - give over already. Labour is a centrist Party that leans slightly left. And that's fine. The whole idea that political parties have to operate as relics of the class system is 50 years out of date.

Yeah you'd think but having been through the absolute pain in the arse of the CB cut off and then the 100k plus paperwork I don't think its that easy

Really it would help if they overhauled the tax system so it "knew" all the information. My "self assessment" when I earnt over 100k basically involved copying the figures from my p60 in the HMRC portal into a different HMRC form. And they still messed up the assessment and caused loads of work for me and their advisors.

It appears absolutely archaic and I'm unsure why in the 21st C

@pointythings ‘The whole idea that political parties have to operate as relics of the class system is 50 years out of date.’

I see. So the whole party is hypocritical not just Starmer and co. All their devotees too. All the Labour Party do is talk about ‘working people’.

We all know what he means, is ‘working class people’ but he’s too desperate to avoid ‘the relics of the class system’. He knows it still exists and so do you. Just more fudging hypocrisy from the champagne socialists.

Yes I agree WFA I’d go with option 4). And apologise for his glaring errors to date too.

Looks like it’s a theme for Sir (June article. Much worse now)

’Writing in the Telegraph, Keir Starmer has condemned benefits “handouts from the state”, saying they lack “dignity”. But Starmer claimed vast amounts of expenses while he was Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP). He spent nearly three times the public money of his successor.’
While Labour Party leader, Starmer has also accepted more freebies than all other Labour leaders since 1997 combined.

Oh dear....what an unedifiying mess he is in, all of his own making. What an utter waste of public money. It's not as if he was any better at the job than those who preceeded or superceeded him. Why does he feel so entitled?

‘Starmer billed taxpayers for nearly a quarter of a million pounds in travel costs while he was director of public prosecutions, it has been revealed.
The future Labour leader put nearly three times as much on expenses as his CPS successor Alison Saunders, including first class flights abroad and a chauffeur driven car.’

Do we have any proof that he was no better than his predecessors and successors?

His successor

After it was announced that Saunders would not be reappointed for a second term, The Daily Telegraph reported, in April 2018, that crime statistics tracking burglary, violent crime and shoplifting all rose significantly under Saunders' tenure as Director of Public Prosecutions.[29]

On 29 December 2018, The Telegraph reported that Saunders would be "the first former head of the Crown Prosecution Service not to receive a senior honour after her tenure was marked by a series of scandals". However, Saunders was named a Dame Commander of the Order of the Bath (DCB) in the 2020 New Year Honours, and was later invested.[30]

A week after Saunders stepped down as head of the CPS, it was announced that the CPS had agreed to a five-figure settlement with broadcaster Paul Gambaccini, who was arrested as part of Operation Yewtree and bailed repeatedly for a year over unfounded sex charges before being told he would not be charged. Samuel Armstrong, a former Conservative MP's chief of staff who was acquitted of rape, said the settlement was a "damning indictment [that] should act as the final nail in the coffin for her hopes of a damehood ... Saunders' one-woman crusade to shift the scales of justice in sex cases not only ruined the lives of dozens of young men but of Paul Gambaccini as well."[31]

Meanwhile back in the real world where people aren't obsessed with titles, the law on buffer zones for abortion clinics is finally being implemented. Excellent news. Well done, Labour Party.

Oh this is getting ridiculous.
Sunak was using tax payer funded private helicopter to get around. Johnson got his whole flat redecorated by a donor.

The squawking about the Starmers seems hypocritical

It's entirely because he set himself out to have the moral high ground. The hypocrite would appear to be Starmer

I have some sympathy with a PM using a helicopter to travel - I am sure it's a more efficent use of time. But £2k a week for what's effectively a civil servant to travel 4 miles a day?

Given how much of the CPS time Yewtree took up under Starmers watch, although apparently not his involvement (how could he, he was too busy flying round the world in first class it now appears) I am not sure that is a particularly useful article to refer to.

He was also called out on the innapropriate use of leaks to the press while in the position, with serious question marks over his integrity as a result. And then of course there was the small matter of the police treatment of citizens and the killing of Ian Tomlinson. Starmer refused to allow the CPS to procecute, on the basis of one pathologist report, which was questioned at the time but that supported his pre determined view that the police were always right. That pathologist was subsequently discredited, and three years after the event the policeman was eventually prosecuted.

A sorry state of affairs, and one that doesn't bode well for light touch government IMO. An technocratic manager that can't take on board other opinions, even when supported by irrevocable facts, is what's leading to these petulant repsonses to justifiable questions. He genuinely believes he is always right. And entitled. Even when he is wrong, and he is not.

Given how much of the CPS time Yewtree took up under Starmers watch

Yewtree started in 2012 - four years into Starmer’s watch - and he stepped down the next year. It’s so unfortunate that facts are so easily checked, isn’t it?

Interesting to see the public sector get some positivity v the private sector, usually I see posts from people feeling hard done by.

I disagree with your majority take in the private sector and still it is not a good idea to shrink that sector via policy and taxes. The public sector may feel immune and some kind of belief it's good for them but it won't be.

Shrink the private sector and soon after the public sector will follow with a similar reduction.

Squawking? Oh dear. Showing yourself up a bit here.

And yes as per @Tryingtokeepgoing ‘ It's entirely because he set himself out to have the moral high ground. The hypocrite would appear to be Starmer’

But you know that. We all know that. That’s why Labour voters keep reverting to ‘but but but the Tories’.. tiresome. And transparent. It’s a bit like the old Ad Hominem arguments. Poor. Desperate. Nothing else to say so revert to.

Those of us who support the current government are not uncritical. We just think it's a bit much to write them off after less than 3 months when they have 14 years of mess to deal with.

I would give any new government a chance. I gave David Cameron'scoalition the benefit of the doubt until the Lansley reforms began to bite. It's a bit sad that Tory supporters aren't prepared to give this new government a shot. Be honest, you started whining on day 1.

Whining. Squawking. Touchy much? Such a shame people can’t have a grown up discussion.says a lot though.

i didn’t make comment on anything til about 2,weeks ago. The vat on education was clearly bitter, but to be expected. The WFA blew me away with its thoughtless impact t on the elderly. The train driver monetary gifts (or rewards for votes if we prefer) made me sick but no surprise. Now these stories about his taking gifts blah blah blah.

It’s not good for them I’m afraid. Idiotic mistakes early on. How long til Ange takes over?

Well, I can't speak for others, but I am not a a Tory supporter I just want better government. And I think I am entitled to call them out on things early on that are diametrically oposed to what they said they'd do. And in particular when you set your stall out as being a government of service, its somewhat disappointing to find out that the service is to themselves and the unions.

I am happy to give them a shot when it comes to policy. I am not willing to give them a shot when it comes to behaviours.

'Whining', 'squawking', just need.a 'frothing' ;

😂😂 and a ‘bot’

Squawking from the right wing media. Not you. It amazes me it's such a story given the Tories got/get such an easy ride. I see Frank Hester donated another 5 million to the Conservatives after his racist, misogynist comments about Diane Abbott.

It's not just 'the right wing media'

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/sep/18/keir-starmer-100000-in-tickets-and-gifts-more-than-any-other-recent-party-leader