New Labour government - legislative agenda

[Smokeandsteam]

The cut to the WFA becomes more perverse and pernicious by the day.

The Times reveals that Reeves has suddenly obtained an additional £10 Billion given changes by the BoE quantitative tightening programme.

Reeves apparently plans to ‘bank the savings’ to ‘underline her commitment to fiscal discipline’

Reeves’s £10bn windfall raises pressure to drop winter fuel cut

Reeves’s £10bn windfall raises pressure to drop winter fuel cut

A decision by the Bank of England will give the chancellor more financial headroom but she is likely to resist calls to ease fiscal discipline

www.thetimes.com

Lucy Powell on Question Time last night also claimed that Labour would be happy for every pensioner entitled to claim pension credit to claim it. When asked what this would mean in practice given that it would wipe out the ‘savings, accrued from cutting the WFA for everyone else there was no answer.

This isn’t a policy it’s a pointless punishment beating of the elderly performed for the market…it gives the distinct impression that Reeves doesn’t have a clue, because the market appears as nonplussed as everyone else.

 

[teuchter]

the market appears as nonplussed as everyone else

What observation prompts you to say this?

 

[Smokeandsteam]

What observation prompts you to say this?

The observation of the evidence. This covers some of it:

“Let’s be clear. Rachel Reeves was under zero pressure from the City to cut investment spending or means-test the £200 or £300 tax-free sum paid to elderly people each winter. There was not the slightest murmur from currency traders before the chancellor’s announcement that she had found a £22bn hole in the public finances. Nor was there ever likely to be.”

Labour’s decision to cut winter fuel payments is mean and politically inept | Larry Elliott

Means-testing will hit up to 2 million people. Rachel Reeves would be wise to admit she was wrong, says Guardian economics editor Larry Elliott

www.theguardian.com

 

[teuchter]

The observation of the evidence. This covers some of it:

“Let’s be clear. Rachel Reeves was under zero pressure from the City to cut investment spending or means-test the £200 or £300 tax-free sum paid to elderly people each winter. There was not the slightest murmur from currency traders before the chancellor’s announcement that she had found a £22bn hole in the public finances. Nor was there ever likely to be.”

Labour’s decision to cut winter fuel payments is mean and politically inept | Larry Elliott

Means-testing will hit up to 2 million people. Rachel Reeves would be wise to admit she was wrong, says Guardian economics editor Larry Elliott

www.theguardian.com

That's a Guardian opinion piece. I wondered what specifically was the indication that "the market" had acted in any particular way to the decision to cut the WFA. What it would have done, if the WFA had not been cut, can only be speculation, surely.

 

[Chz]

What aggravates me almost as much is the stupidity of it. We were promised grown-up politicians who could do the whole politicking thing well. Not as their first order of business publicly tell old people to freeze for a frankly pithy amount of money savings. I do expect a Starmer to introduce things like that, but I'd expected it to be buried in a mountain of other things 9 months into government. Not "Job One - Fuck Old People". Particularly when May had already been to that particular place with predictable results. I expect my politicians to be evil, but could they not at least be competent at it?

 

[gosub]

Market wise...UK been shadowing the US on rates for a while...US just cut 0.5% UK isn't...(yet)

 

[PR1Berske]

Market wise...UK been shadowing the US on rates for a while...US just cut 0.5% UK isn't...(yet)

They'll cut in November.