The Labour Party under Keir Starmer

[Meole]

Could you provide some evidence for those assertions, please?

So there was no black hole at election time and it is entirely the creation of Reeves/Starmer ?

 

[takno]

I would say it will depends and with all actions there are consequences.

With my partner, we together earn an income of £125,000 through different streams but still claim full child benefits through reducing our income lower enough through paying extra payments into our pension pots. At the moment, this strategy makes sense financially to ensure we have enough to live on now and ensure we are saving quite nicely for the future.

Should Labour change the rules around these areas, we will of course need to adjust our plan. However that is most likely to lead to reduce pension payments, spend more now and thus increase the risk of the Government needed to financially support us in our retirement years. Thus the Government will benefit now, but will pay for that decision in the next few decade.

Challenging to get the right balance as always.

If you're earning £125k between you, you probably won't be getting any Government support as a pensioner even if you only pay in the minimum. At that level it's more your choice whether you want to live on a fair bit more than the pension credit amount or a lot more than the pension credit amount.

 

[Simon11]

Is this risk really that significant to the Government, on pensions of two people earning that much?

Considering that most people do not put enough towards their retirement and haven't considered the huge cost of retiring/ aging, its quite important.

From www.carehome.co.uk:

The average weekly cost of residential care if you are a self-funder is £1,160, while the average nursing home cost if you are funding your own care is £1,410 per week across the UK.

Should as a nation we encourage people to properly save for their retirement or should people just rely on the government to cover these huge fees as far too many people do.

 

[Gloster]

One thing that might go is the £2 cap on bus fares, with it either abolished or the sum raised. It is a bit of an anomaly and one can wonder why the Conservatives introduced it as it doesn’t really do much for their main electoral targets: pensioners, the well-off and (not so much) the self-employed. I sometimes feel that it was a ploy to pretend that they really do care about all those who can’t afford helicopters. It is a problem as the main benefactors are more likely to be Labour voters, but it is a fairly simple way of saving money.

It will be interesting to see how the Mailypressograph reacts: habitual outrage at anything Labour does, even though it is the less well off who are hit, or lack of interest because it doesn’t affect their demographic. (Sun readers aren’t interested in a bus unless it has a -t at the end.)

 

[Ediswan]

One thing that might go is the £2 cap on bus fares, with it either abolished or the sum raised.

The cap is already due to end 31-Dec-2024.

 

[Gloster]

The cap is already due to end 31-Dec-2024.

Nicely kicked down the road by the Conservatives, leaving Labour with the decision and to take the blame for not renewing it. (Although that may be crediting the Conservatives with more advance planning than they are capable of.)

 

[DarloRich]

One thing that might go is the £2 cap on bus fares

It has got me on the bus!

The cap is already due to end 31-Dec-2024.

It should continue indefinitely if at all possible. it is useful for those of limited mobility ( whether social or otherwise) and those on low wages trying to struggle along. I would make everyone who owns a car pay and extra £1 a year to fund it!

The Black hole is basically the Labour government giving doctors a 15% pay rise and the cost of asylum seekers arriving on boats.

really? Well , yes according to the IFS. ( in that the costs of "supporting" asylum seekers wasn't in the Home Office budget and the Tories had set aside a paltry sum for pay increases!) It seems the Tories expected the asylum bill to be paid for from contingency, which they conveniently forgot, that they had already spent!

However the Tories ran up a £3BILLION bill for hotel accommodation because they seem to have just given up trying to process claims and simply decided relay on thier send the bu$$ers back Rwanda plan rather than the boring work of churning through applications and removing those not successful.

But to imply that benefits shouldn't be given to people who don't need it starts an interesting line of logic. Does a couple with an annual income of £120,000 need child benefit, for instance?

no - next question

Same as winter fuel payments. They should go to those in need not those who think they are in need. £120K a year is a fortune by most standards. The UK average wage is C.£35k.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Allowing speculation to run for a couple of months will probably result in all sorts of scary ideas being floated, so when it actually happens it probably won't be as bad as those rumours suggested.

That is standard political modus operandi isn't it?

 

[Harpo]

That is standard political modus operandi isn't it?

Unless you’re Liz Truss.

 

[takno]

Considering that most people do not put enough towards their retirement and haven't considered the huge cost of retiring/ aging, its quite important.

From www.carehome.co.uk:

Should as a nation we encourage people to properly save for their retirement or should people just rely on the government to cover these huge fees as far too many people do.

The majority of people never actually incur these costs, which are completely overwhelming compared to all the other costs that most pensioners have. It's completely beyond the ability of all but the richest people to save up for. As such the only credible private-sector solution would be insurance, and actually a publicly-funded and provided solution makes more sense, not least because a national service can realise decent economies of scale, and maybe start addressing what costs and levels of care are sustainable. Whichever way you look at it this isn't something which is every likely to figure into anybody's pension planning.

I don't think the current solution is particularly bad as it goes. A lot of the costs are covered by forcing people to sell their houses when they move into a home, and by forcing them to use savings down to the last 35 thousand. It would probably be more equitable to remove this requirement, and instead recoup more of the costs from inheritance tax by removing the relief for homes.

 

[Bishopstone]

Starmer's decision to accept a gift of suits and eyewear to the value of £20k was ill-advised. It's the sort of story that would have got snarky talk radio hosts gushing with indignation under Boris Johnson. If I were him, I'd return the designer gear.

 

[Howardh]

Think the general feeling is that the £2 cap has got more people on the buses and to scrap it would be an ironic financial hit on the bus companies/councils if pax deserted the buses. If it were to go I hope there would be a sweetener by a cap on all-day fares so if a single into town became £3.50, then the return via an all-day ticket priced at £5 (max) would only cost £1 more than the two singles @ £2.

That aside, wouldn't it be the longer-distance rides (eg Bolton to Chorley, Prestin to Blackpool by bus for £2 where the increase in pax can be seen? Windermere to Dungeon Ghyll £2...what's not to love?!!

 

[Purple Train]

Having despaired at the previous financial bleeding out of basics such as health, water, policing, local authorities, roads etc., while electoral cash bribes continued, my instincts were that we probably weren’t paying enough in taxes to fund what we really need and was braced for some ‘pain’.

Hopefully, whatever pain is coming I hope it is better considered and more holistic that the brutal winter fuel allowance axe which came with no accompanying mitigations such as abolishing energy standing charges.

Starmer has the in-tray and finances from hell and is clearly wicket-rolling business and taxpayer alike. I just hope his and Reeves’ conclusions and actions are much better thought through this time.

Indeed, I completely agree with this.

Given the outgoing governments difficult relationship with ‘the truth’ and the very small number of weeks since their dismissal, I’m more inclined to wait for some evidence.

People have short memories, alas. The paper headlines I saw on my brief foray into Sainsbury's this morning were ridiculous considering all this. Sadly people keep on assuming in alarmingly large numbers that Starmer has a magic wand.

We cannot have it both ways. People were sick of the Tories because of their constant stream of populist untruths. Voting for an end to populist government and then condemning the new government for not sugarcoating that hard truth is madness.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

We cannot have it both ways. People were sick of the Tories because of their constant stream of populist untruths. Voting for an end to populist government and then condemning the new government for not sugarcoating that hard truth is madness.

10/10 - exactly.

 

[brad465]

People have short memories, alas. The paper headlines I saw on my brief foray into Sainsbury's this morning were ridiculous considering all this. Sadly people keep on assuming in alarmingly large numbers that Starmer has a magic wand.

We cannot have it both ways. People were sick of the Tories because of their constant stream of populist untruths. Voting for an end to populist government and then condemning the new government for not sugarcoating that hard truth is madness.

"A lie is like a painkiller, it provides instant relief but has lasting side effects. Truth is like surgery, it hurts but eventually heals."

While there are plenty of lies in politics for personal gain, the other major reason politicians lie is because the public cannot handle the truth. This doesn't just apply to politics either, we all lie to our friends and family for this reason too (apparently "I'm fine", is the most common lie).

 

[Merle Haggard]

Same as winter fuel payments. They should go to those in need not those who think they are in need. £120K a year is a fortune by most standards. The UK average wage is C.£35k.

It's interesting why it was decided to remove the former and leave the latter, though. There's even seems to be some sentiment towards removing the cap on the number of children eligible.

 

[Yew]

I must admit, I'm not massively impressed with what has been announced so far. Rather than addressing the key issues in our Society, he has been focusing on restricting smoking outdoors, and persecuting parents for taking their children on holiday.

 

[takno]

I must admit, I'm not massively impressed with what has been announced so far. Rather than addressing the key issues in our Society, he has been focusing on restricting smoking outdoors, and persecuting parents for taking their children on holiday.

Those are a couple of things I'm not very impressed by, but there were something like 100 bills in the king's speech, and plenty of things announced which don't require legislation. Those two particular things seem to poll fairly well for some reason, so they've been presented as easy wins.

No point even starting to judge them until after the first budget, preferably the second.

 

[Dunnyrail]

Remembering the cancellation of Prescott”s proposed Tram systems by Darling I fully expect any addition to the railway being cancelled even though much money may already have been spent. Just waiting for October Budget:-
East West beyond Bletchley
HS2\Northern Power House
Cornwall Metro
Any new Tube Stock not already ordered
Suspending work on Cross-rail 2 again!
Fawley Branch
New Trains for SE (Dartford etc)
Resting Beeching cuts
BUT
Black Cat to Caxton will continue
how many other road systems will be allowed “to grow the economy” hang the environment.

 

[Yew]

Those two particular things seem to poll fairly well for some reason, so they've been presented as easy wins.

That is odd, as most polling suggests a pretty strong stance against holiday fines, and at best inconclusive for pub gardens.

Given the vast variety of pubs restaurants, it is unlikely that some coarse one-size-fits-all policy would work well.

 

[takno]

That is odd, as most polling suggests a pretty strong stance against holiday fines, and at best inconclusive for pub gardens.

Given the vast variety of pubs restaurants, it is unlikely that some coarse one-size-fits-all policy would work well.

I was mostly talking about the smoking outside pubs. The polling I saw had >50% support. I think it's a pretty stupid policy overall, although it seems to work fine without any particularly dramatic consequences in Sweden, which has a rather higher level of smoking. I'm far more concerned with age-based smoking ban tbh. In both cases it's Sunak who came up with the legislation, and made it inevitable that they would be carried on.

The holiday fines is just continuity stupid. There are significant groups at the DfE who are obsessed with the idea that forcing schools to treat parents like scum is the best way to build up an effective trust-based relationship between them, and ministers generally don't care enough to argue. They have at least started to address the hopeless mess of Ofsted inspections, so I'd call a score draw on that.

 

[Gloster]

I suspect that they have intended from the very first to water down the smoking ban as the bill goes through Parliament and finally come up with something more workable. (“We have listened.”)

The holiday fines bill may go the same way, but something does need to be done: letting it slide only makes children think that school isn’t important. And when you have had a number of youngsters being banged up for rioting and others committing murder (so it is alleged), Labour needs a quick start to a programme to deal with all the disaffected youth. This has conveniently come along at the right time, but cutting school absenteeism is still a good thing. Much as it would useful to build up a relationship between schools and parents, some parents will not be told and will wreck their children’s futures for purely selfish reasons.

 

[Yew]

The holiday fines bill may go the same way, but something does need to be done: letting it slide only makes children think that school isn’t important. And when you have had a number of youngsters being banged up for rioting and others committing murder (so it is alleged), Labour needs a quick start to a programme to deal with all the disaffected youth. This has conveniently come along at the right time, but cutting school absenteeism is still a good thing. Much as it would useful to build up a relationship between schools and parents, some parents will not be told and will wreck their children’s futures for purely selfish reasons.

When I was at school, absence could be requested from a form, but it would usually be granted. This taught children that the system should be respected, but also that the system should be reasonable. These days we have respectable and otherwise law-abiding taking their kids out of school, and incurring fines to does, what does that teach kids?

 

[Darandio]

These days we have respectable and otherwise law-abiding taking their kids out of school, and incurring fines to does, what does that teach kids?

Maybe we could ask the Conservatives? After all they did introduce fines.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

This doesn't just apply to politics either, we all lie to our friends and family for this reason too (apparently "I'm fine", is the most common lie).

Yes and without going too far OT, it can be serious. Those with mental health issues for example. I accept politicians lie though even though I don't like it. Even Churchill lied.

 

[yorkie]

Just a gentle reminder that when submitting a post that relates to something you read/heard from an external source, please can the source be referenced, and if at all possible a hyperlink be provided, along with a text quote (if it's a TV/radio item you saw/heard, there would usually be an online version). Thanks

When I was at school, absence could be requested from a form, but it would usually be granted. This taught children that the system should be respected, but also that the system should be reasonable. These days we have respectable and otherwise law-abiding taking their kids out of school, and incurring fines to does, what does that teach kids?

School attendance is a topic in its own right; if anyone creates a thread on the subject, I will be happy to provide a bit more insight, and my views!

 

[Shrop]

The Winter Fuel Payment is highly topical at present, but why can't it be means tested? Those on state pension only (ie no work pension) should get the full payment, those with small works pensions should get most of it, those on slightly bigger works pensions should get a small payment, while that quarter of all pensioners who are millionaires (yes really!) should get none of this payment. Yet for some reason I can't fathom, when it comes to the winter fuel payment, this Government is treating millionaires exactly the same as those who have almost no pension whatsoever, and who really are struggling to pay their bills.

This isn't exactly rocket science, yet none of the interviewers interrogating countless politician about it on TV and radio, ever seem to mention it. Does anyone know why this payment can't be means tested?

 

[Merle Haggard]

The Winter Fuel Payment is highly topical at present, but why can't it be means tested? Those on state pension only (ie no work pension) should get the full payment, those with small works pensions should get most of it, those on slightly bigger works pensions should get a small payment, while that quarter of all pensioners who are millionaires (yes really!) should get none of this payment. Yet for some reason I can't fathom, when it comes to the winter fuel payment, this Government is treating millionaires exactly the same as those who have almost no pension whatsoever, and who really are struggling to pay their bills.

This isn't exactly rocket science, yet none of the interviewers interrogating countless politician about it on TV and radio, ever seem to mention it. Does anyone know why this payment can't be means tested?

In my opinion an easy way in the short term would be payment to be based on no income tax paid. The personal tax allowance was intended to represent the income for subsistence (i.e. no unnecessary luxuries) and it's about the same level as the cut off for WFA, so Work & Pensions just ask HMC for a list of people > pensionable age who pay no tax.
A taper could also be developed based on income tax paid.
Obviously could be manipulated nut the cost of a tax avoidance lawyer probably > £300

 

[takno]

In my opinion an easy way in the short term would be payment to be based on no income tax paid. The personal tax allowance was intended to represent the income for subsistence (i.e. no unnecessary luxuries) and it's about the same level as the cut off for WFA, so Work & Pensions just ask HMC for a list of people > pensionable age who pay no tax.
A taper could also be developed based on income tax paid.
Obviously could be manipulated nut the cost of a tax avoidance lawyer probably > £300

I'm not sure the personal tax allowance was designed at all. It was substantially increased to an arbitrary (but no unreasonable) level in the coalition years, but inflation has been allowed to completely ravage it since then.

Personally I'd have thought that completely eliminating the winter allowance and increasing the pension credit by 300 quid would be a more equitable thing to do, achieving something for a similar range of people, but removing silly cliff edges.

The problem with any alternatives is that the money is needed this year if we are to start digging ourselves out of the hole we are in. It's felt to be possible to implement the currently-proposed solution this year, because it has been lovingly prepared for years by what you might call treasury mandarins who have been waiting for a chancellor with a backbone. Other solutions simply won't be ready for the budget.

Honestly I suspect by the time the budget is through that this will be the least of most peoples concerns

 

[dangie]

The Winter Fuel Payment is highly topical at present, but why can't it be means tested?

I really have no problem with this. I’m fortunate, whilst not being at all well off, I don’t need the Winter Fuel Payment to heat my home. So if it does stop, I won’t complain.

However, another argument could be that those who have had a well paid job throughout their working career and thus now have a good pension, they have always and still do pay a fair bit of their incoming's in Income Tax. So why shouldn’t they now receive something back? The same argument goes for the Concessionary Bus Pass. They’ve paid a lot in, now receive a little back.

Of course the Winter Fuel Payment & Bus Pass are not issued automatically, they need to be applied for. So if you don’t need them, or don’t want them, then don’t apply for them.