I can't speak for NS but I have my thoughts.
You cannot say you are going to keep the winter fuel allowance for all pensioners and then get rid of it. OK, it wasn't in the manifesto but up until a few weeks before the announcement Labour ministers were saying there would be no change.
Same with WASPI women - Labour supported them when in opposition giving the impression they would support them. Get elected then do a quick volte face.
As to the proposed changes to the benefit system, yes it needs overhauling, but should a Labour administration be targeting the poorest in society without saying what they will do to offset the losses to individuals that even the govt says will happen.
I just think you are being completely disingenuous here. If it were a Tory government doing these things you would be up in arms about it and rightly so.
Anyway new slogan announced:
The Labour government out conservating the conservatives.
Thanks AT - but you are answering a different question to the one I asked.
I didn't ask whether you thought that Labour were a bunch of lying bastards for doing things in government that they said they wouldn't do in opposition.
What I asked was for your views on the actual issues.
And actually you are wrong that I'd be livid if the Tories had done these things, although there is some nuance.
On the WASPI women I would have been livid if they'd been compensated by the tories.
On WFA - I've never considered that these blanket payments to pensioners regardless of how rich or otherwise they were was justified. I'm pretty well off and will be when I retire. I'm too young currently to get WFA but when I get to that age I don't think it is appropriate use of tax payers money to give me a bung which I demonstrable won't need. There are far better uses for that money.
On benefits - well this is more complex and of course unlike to two above we don't really have the details. And here there may be a difference, which would be motivation. Had the tories proposed this I would have had concerns that it was merely a cost cutting measure to support tax cuts for the more well off. I have some hope (you might suggest naivety) that Labour will not just see this as a necessary measure to reduce the cost of benefits which will become increasingly unsustainable. But will also see this as a way to genuinely support people into work, which I think is an absolute priority. The number of people who could work if supported but are stuck, often for life, living entirely off benefits is frankly a scandal.
So AT - I'd be grateful if you could provide your views on whether you support or do not support the three issues, regardless of whether you consider Labour to be disingenuous through to lying bastards.
