Does Teachers Bother To Look At A Childs...
ChatterBank1 min ago
Starmer Says Tories Should Apologise For Winter Fuel Payments Cut....
...ahead of possible conference defeat//
No, Mr Starmer. This was your government's decision. Having an 'oops' moment now and blaming the other bloke because you're unnerved by rebellion in your own ranks isn't going to wash with the public. This won't be forgotten.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by naomi24. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
That Twitter clip from May this year is completely damning. If he had any political nous he should have thought 'I've just had a go at Sunak about the WFA, so I can't take it away'.
What with all the freebies he's been getting from a crony as well, the man is a hypocrite of breathtaking proportions and is not fit for purpose.
Lisa Nandy said on Jeremy Vine yesterday that pensioners won't be any worse off this winter because in April they will be getting hundreds of pounds pension increase, thanks to Labour's triple lock system. I think the old pension is £300 and the new one £400. Read it somewhere but can't remember where.
Surely Keir Starmer can afford £20,000 to provide a space for his son and doesn't need to accept bribes.
//Lisa Nandy said on Jeremy Vine yesterday that pensioners won't be any worse off this winter because in April they will be getting hundreds of pounds pension increase, thanks to Labour's triple lock system. I think the old pension is £300 and the new one £400. Read it somewhere but can't remember where.//
That argument is disingenuous isn't it. The triple lock is not Labour's- it's been in place for years and Labour are just retaining it. But it's not really a big increase as most of it simply covers the increase in prices (inflation). (It may have gone up by slightly more due to the link to wages but it's not much more than inflation). So in real terms the increase is far less than the figures claimed and is outweighed by the loss of WFA.
I know you know cashier. It just chimed with my own annoyance at how they seem to get away with these responses without being challenged by the interviewer.
Even more disingenuous was when Rachel Reeves was claiming that thanks to the triple lock pensioners would be £1700 better off by the end of the Labour government's five year term. Once again it ignored inflation - in real terms it would be at best only a few hundred pounds, and due to frozen thresholds 20% of most of the increase would be lost in tax. They may well be worse off in real terms- and that's on top of any loss of WFA and threatened removal of some council tax reductions.
Lisa Nandy was also asked if she though MP's should accept free tickets to pop concerts, sports events etc and she said yes because it's important that the public realise they are real people who like the same things ordinary people do. Again doesn't realise they could easily afford to buy the tickets and a lot of ordinary people can't. She also spouted 'open and transparent' about freebies, so another new slogan. New Labour, New Disaster would be more apt.
The same Lisa Nandy who said it was OK for Starmer to accept £20k of suits and specs as he needed to look good for the public (I'm pretty sure a man reputed to be worth £7m can buy his own suits to look good for the public). Lammy defended it for the same reason.
Surely there's no way they can agree with the pony they were spouting, is there?
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles21 mins ago
Jokes37 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles38 mins ago
Crosswords38 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.