Labour's Britain: A Landscape of Bluster and Inaction

[maesariang]

1 hour ago, James105 said:

 

From your own "fact check" link:

 

Claim: Labour’s own analysis said 4,000 pensioners could die if winter fuel payments are cut

Verdict: True

 

Also from the same link:

 

"On Sunday, Mr McDonnell was asked if he believed some pensioners “will die” as a result of what Rachel Reeves is proposing, and he told LBC: “Yes. That’s not me speaking.”

 

So what do you think of people like Starmer who knowingly plan to implement a policy that will kill pensioners before their time?   

So cold kills people not heat.

[James105]

51 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

As explained, different policy, different time, different circumstances.

 

You need to demonstrate that the Government are aware of increased deaths from the current proposal under the current circumstances 

 

 

 

The current circumstances are that fuel is more expensive than in 2017 and the number of deaths are likely to be significantly higher than in 2017.    It is the same policy.  

 

Everyone from the far-left to the right knows that this is a stupid policy that at best will only save £1.4bn and at worst will do nothing if all those that can claim pension credits do claim pension credits.   The only people who do not seem to realise that this policy is stupid is the Labour cabinet and tribalist morons.   If it wasn't a stupid policy then Labour would let it's MPs have a free vote on this.   Instead they are forcing all their MPs to have on their permanent record that they voted to take away pensioners winter fuel allowance which led to thousands of old people dying before their time as they couldn't afford to heat their homes.   

[Chomper Higgot]

1 minute ago, Bkk Brian said:

Deflection, is that statement false?

 

Do you still regard the Telegraph readers as Brain Dead?

Not a deflection Brian a statement of the actual timeline with linked reports highlighting the absurdity of the Telegraph pasting this on Labour.

 

 

I’ve already given and explained my opinion of Telegraph readers, you already responded to my comments, so why Brian are you asking again?

[James105]

3 minutes ago, maesariang said:

So cold kills people not heat.

 

It always has been this way.  Even in Thailand more people die from cold related deaths than heat related deaths.   

 

https://ourworldindata.org/part-one-how-many-people-die-from-extreme-temperatures-and-how-could-this-change-in-the-future

 

[maesariang]

2 minutes ago, James105 said:

 

It always has been this way.  Even in Thailand more people die from cold related deaths than heat related deaths.   

 

https://ourworldindata.org/part-one-how-many-people-die-from-extreme-temperatures-and-how-could-this-change-in-the-future

 

So global warming will save lives.

[Bkk Brian]

2 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Not a deflection Brian a statement of the actual timeline with linked reports highlighting the absurdity of the Telegraph pasting this on Labour.

 

 

I’ve already given and explained my opinion of Telegraph readers, you already responded to my comments, so why Brian are you asking again?

If you were not deflecting you would answer whether that statement was true or not.

 

I along with over 2 million other people sometimes read the Telegraph, your inflammatory remarks that we are brain dead are disgusting and only lead to division. 

[Chomper Higgot]

7 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

If you were not deflecting you would answer whether that statement was true or not.

 

I along with over 2 million other people sometimes read the Telegraph, your inflammatory remarks that we are brain dead are disgusting and only lead to division. 

Brian, I have been unequivocal in my statements and provided my reasoning, I accept it’s not everyone’s cup of tea.

 

Having demonstrated the very clear misrepresentation by The Telegraph of the events surrounding the delay in executing the A40 improvements I feel I ought, with the friendliest of intentions, suggest you might want read something less overtly biased than is The Telegraph.

 

 

[Bkk Brian]

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Brian, I have been unequivocal in my statements and provided my reasoning, I accept it’s not everyone’s cup of tea.

 

Having demonstrated the very clear misrepresentation by The Telegraph of the events surrounding the delay in executing the A40 improvements I feel I ought, with the friendliest of intentions, suggest you might want read something less overtly biased than is The Telegraph.

 

 

Not only is it not everyones cup of tea, its also derogatory and against forum rules. I read many media outlets and do not need advice from you who goes around flaming others and calling them brain dead.

[Chomper Higgot]

6 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Not only is it not everyones cup of tea, its also derogatory and against forum rules. I read many media outlets and do not need advice from you who goes around flaming others and calling them brain dead.

It was advice give with ‘the friendliest of intentions’.

 

Anyhow, The Telegram clearly omitted salient facts that undermine their ‘hit piece’.

 

[Bkk Brian]

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

It was advice give with ‘the friendliest of intentions’.

 

Anyhow, The Telegram clearly omitted salient facts that undermine their ‘hit piece’.

 

Your name calling is not advice and save your advice on what I should read for somebody else you think is brain dead

[nauseus]

5 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

IMO your bar for hate speech is incredibly low.

 

So is the crieria here for "world news"!

[James105]

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

No they have not.

The vote has not yet takeN place.

 

It will be voteD on todaY.   

 

They are behaving even worse than it appears they are:

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/winter-fuel-payment-starmer-reeves-b2609520.html

 

"Labour refuses to publish impact assessment of winter fuel payment cuts until after MPs have voted"

 

So to be clear.  They are forcing Labour MPs to vote to remove the winter fuel allowance and will not release the impact assessment on this measure until after they have voted, thereby forcing them to vote a particular way on something without all the details.  This is going beyond clown level politics now.  

[JonnyF]

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Having demonstrated the very clear misrepresentation by The Telegraph of the events surrounding the delay in executing the A40 improvements I feel I ought, with the friendliest of intentions, suggest you might want read something less overtly biased than is The Telegraph.

 

Said without a hint of irony, from 1 of the 100 avid readers of The Guardian 😃.

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, James105 said:

 

It will be voteD on todaY.   

 

They are behaving even worse than it appears they are:

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/winter-fuel-payment-starmer-reeves-b2609520.html

 

"Labour refuses to publish impact assessment of winter fuel payment cuts until after MPs have voted"

 

So to be clear.  They are forcing Labour MPs to vote to remove the winter fuel allowance and will not release the impact assessment on this measure until after they have voted, thereby forcing them to vote a particular way on something without all the details.  This is going beyond clown level politics now.  

Yes it will be voted on today.

 

Your statement was incorrect:

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

 

Said without a hint of irony, from 1 of the 100 avid readers of The Guardian 😃.

Odd thing to say in a thread discussing a Telegraph article.

 

 

[PETERTHEEATER]

6 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

LMAO 

 

Even brain dead Telegraph readers might, and I stress might, be able to figure out that car park has been in existence a long time before July 5.

 

 

I'm not defending the Tories but the writer does say that the Eynsham car park debacle is 'a fitting metaphor' for the state of the country under Starmer

[Maybole]

15 hours ago, Red Forever said:

Jeez, more right wing drivel from the Torygraph.

I wonder which political party was in power when acquisition of land, planning and actual building of this car park in Eynsham took place.

Here's a clue: Labour have been in power for just 2 months.

I agree, it takes at least two years to plan and build sch a project.

[stoner]

11 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

t was advice give with ‘the friendliest of intentions’.

 

of course it was. you are such a friendly person. everyone knows it. 

[Chomper Higgot]

7 hours ago, stoner said:

 

of course it was. you are such a friendly person. everyone knows it. 

I’m pleased you recognize that stoner, more so that you took the trouble to post on the matter.

 

[James105]

19 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Yes it will be voted on today.

 

Your statement was incorrect:

 

 

 

So the nasty party voted to take away the winter fuel allowance which according to their own review will kill 4000 pensioners before their time.   Even your comrades at the guardian are aghast at this.  

 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/2024/sep/10/keir-starmer-rachel-reeves-britain-pensioners-winter-fuel-allowance

 

There is a huge amount of voter regret from the 1 in 5 people who actually voted for Labour, so at least this nasty, hypocritical little clown show will be gone after a single term.  

[thaibeachlovers]

35 minutes ago, James105 said:

There is a huge amount of voter regret from the 1 in 5 people who actually voted for Labour, so at least this nasty, hypocritical little clown show will be gone after a single term.  

If there is anything left to vote for in 5 years time.

Had the Tories not been just as bad , Starmer would still be languishing in opposition. I blame Sunak.

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, James105 said:

 

So the nasty party voted to take away the winter fuel allowance which according to their own review will kill 4000 pensioners before their time.   Even your comrades at the guardian are aghast at this.  

 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/2024/sep/10/keir-starmer-rachel-reeves-britain-pensioners-winter-fuel-allowance

 

There is a huge amount of voter regret from the 1 in 5 people who actually voted for Labour, so at least this nasty, hypocritical little clown show will be gone after a single term.  

No they did not.

 

They voted for it to be means tested.

[James105]

14 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

No they did not.

 

They voted for it to be means tested.

 

Still holding the party line eh comrade, even though it is a policy that only saves money if the poorest and most vulnerable do not fill out the 243 question form to get the pension credits they are entitled to?   There was a reason this was a universal benefit as it was understood that too many vulnerable old people cannot complete that lengthy application process, even though they would be entitled to it.  

 

So Labours figures which save a measly £1.3bn are based on the fact they know the most vulnerable will not be able to cope with applying for pension credits and are actually relying on the most vulnerable, poorest people not applying for it.  They literally voted to kill old people before their time.   Labour are a truly nasty party.  

[Chomper Higgot]

19 minutes ago, James105 said:

 

Still holding the party line eh comrade, even though it is a policy that only saves money if the poorest and most vulnerable do not fill out the 243 question form to get the pension credits they are entitled to?   There was a reason this was a universal benefit as it was understood that too many vulnerable old people cannot complete that lengthy application process, even though they would be entitled to it.  

 

So Labours figures which save a measly £1.3bn are based on the fact they know the most vulnerable will not be able to cope with applying for pension credits and are actually relying on the most vulnerable, poorest people not applying for it.  They literally voted to kill old people before their time.   Labour are a truly nasty party.  

They don’t have to fill out any forms, the means test is based on already being in receipt of additional benefits.

 

Those other means tested benefits are far more significant than the winter fuel allowance, do let us know if you are joining the calls for universal benefits to replace means tested benefits.

£1.3Billion is a lot less than the £22Billion hole in public finances the Tories hid from the OBR but is by no means a measly sum.

 

[James105]

57 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

They don’t have to fill out any forms, the means test is based on already being in receipt of additional benefits.

 

Those other means tested benefits are far more significant than the winter fuel allowance, do let us know if you are joining the calls for universal benefits to replace means tested benefits.

£1.3Billion is a lot less than the £22Billion hole in public finances the Tories hid from the OBR but is by no means a measly sum.

 

 

Yes they do have to complete a form to get pension credits.   It's a 243 question form that is impossible for the poorest, oldest, most vulnerable are not able to complete.   

 

"The DWP estimates that around 880,000 households eligible for Pension Credit do not claim it."

 

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-10094/#:~:text=The DWP estimates that around,Credit do not claim it.

 

If those 880,000 of the poorest, most vulnerable all claim pension credit then removing the fuel allowance would make no savings.   It is a policy that relies on the most vulnerable to be too vulnerable to complete the complex form.   It's a callous, nasty policy voted for by the nasty party, and is the reason that this nasty party will be responsible for thousands of premature deaths this winter if they do not backtrack on this.    

 

The tories are not responsible for Labour spaffing £9bn on inflation busting public sector pay rises.  They are not responsible for Labour promising £3bn to Ukraine.  The Tories are not responsible for Labours pledge to donate £11.6bn to Africa for 'climate change'.  The only party responsible for every premature death that occurs this winter due to this policy is Labour.  

[JonnyF]

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

£1.3Billion is a lot less than the £22Billion hole in public finances the Tories hid from the OBR but is by no means a measly sum.

 

The "black hole" is simply a lie to try and justify the nasty Labour party going after the weak and vulnerable pensioners. 

 

Even if it were true, there are other ways to recover it rather than allowing old people to freeze to death.  

 

https://ifs.org.uk/articles/ps22bn-black-hole-was-obvious-anyone-who-dared-look

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

 

The "black hole" is simply a lie to try and justify the nasty Labour party going after the weak and vulnerable pensioners. 

 

Even if it were true, there are other ways to recover it rather than allowing old people to freeze to death.  

 

https://ifs.org.uk/articles/ps22bn-black-hole-was-obvious-anyone-who-dared-look

 

 

Not obvious to the OBR.

 

 

https://fullfact.org/economy/labour-government-blackhole-public-finances/

 

[James105]

5 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Not obvious to the OBR.

 

 

https://fullfact.org/economy/labour-government-blackhole-public-finances/

 

 

They knew about it before they did the following:

1. Gave away £9bn to inflation busting public sector pay rises.  This could have been £1.4bn less with zero impact

2. Gave yet another £3bn to Ukraine.  This could have been £1.4bn less with zero impact

3. Pledged £11.6bn to climate change in Africa.  This could have been £11.6bn less but would mean 11 less African billionaires but otherwise would have zero impact.

 

Choices comrade, choices.  They cannot complain about black holes when they give so much money taxpayers money away and they could have chosen not to kill thousands of pensioners this winter.   

[Chomper Higgot]

3 minutes ago, James105 said:

 

They knew about it before they did the following:

1. Gave away £9bn to inflation busting public sector pay rises.  This could have been £1.4bn less with zero impact

2. Gave yet another £3bn to Ukraine.  This could have been £1.4bn less with zero impact

3. Pledged £11.6bn to climate change in Africa.  This could have been £11.6bn less but would mean 11 less African billionaires but otherwise would have zero impact.

 

Choices comrade, choices.  They cannot complain about black holes when they give so much money taxpayers money away and they could have chosen not to kill thousands of pensioners this winter.   

Let’s just put one of your claims to the test.

 

Provide a link that backs up your claim that climate change funding to Africa has created 11 African Billionaires.

[James105]

10 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Let’s just put one of your claims to the test.

 

Provide a link that backs up your claim that climate change funding to Africa has created 11 African Billionaires.

 

How about you provide a link that shows Africa is not corrupt and every single penny of that money will be spent on climate change.