Labour’s Broken Promises and Two-Tier Governance Are Dividing Britain

[Social Media]

 

In a blistering critique of the Labour government’s first hundred days, former Conservative MP Ben Wallace argues that Prime Minister Keir Starmer and his team have already begun to diverge from their campaign promises, creating a divisive, two-tier society that favors the public sector over the private. Instead of unity, Labour has reportedly fostered an atmosphere of division and uncertainty across the United Kingdom, undermining the very promises on which it was elected. According to Wallace, Labour's actions reveal its true priorities, which are not in line with the needs of the many, but rather tailored to benefit a select few.

 

One of the central criticisms Wallace raises is Labour’s handling of tax promises. During the campaign, Labour assured voters it would not raise taxes on “working people.” However, Wallace contends that what Labour really meant was that it would avoid tax increases only on public sector employees. In practice, he argues, those who rely on taxpayer money for salaries and benefits enjoy increased protections and “record pay rises,” all financed by taxpayers in the private sector. Wallace argues that Labour is driving a wedge between those who spend taxpayer money—mainly in the public sector—and those who generate it in the private sector, including small business owners, farmers, and self-employed individuals.

 

The disparities Wallace outlines are significant, particularly in terms of pension contributions. He points out that while the average public sector worker benefits from an employer pension contribution of approximately 24 to 30 percent, along with guaranteed job security, private sector workers receive only 4 to 8 percent in employer contributions with far less security. Wallace also highlights the burden of the national debt—over £1.5 trillion—and the public sector pension liability of more than £2.5 trillion, questioning why Labour has focused so heavily on wages without addressing the “overall package” of benefits public sector workers receive. This approach, he believes, shifts the financial burden onto those in the private sector, who often lack similar job protections or retirement benefits.

 

Wallace also raises concerns about Labour’s transparency and integrity, emphasizing that “there isn’t a week that goes by without another election pledge being exposed as false.” He accuses Starmer and his team of hypocrisy, citing specific examples, including Chancellor Rachel Reeves’ campaign commitment not to raise national insurance and her “iron-clad” pledge to maintain fiscal discipline. He criticizes Labour’s habit of blaming unfulfilled promises on the argument that “things were worse than we thought,” suggesting this refrain is added to every government statement to obscure Labour’s failure to act on its election promises.

 

According to Wallace, Labour’s campaign language was strategically “slippery and nebulous,” particularly in references to “working people” in its manifesto. He questions whether Labour, during its 14 years in opposition, was too occupied with political theater to prepare for governance, noting the frequency with which election pledges are exposed as misleading or outright false. He also accuses the government of leveraging envy and divisiveness, alienating private sector workers and citizens outside the public sector.

 

Reflecting on his own experiences in office, Wallace underscores the importance of cross-party cooperation, something he says he was criticized for, yet firmly believes is essential for effective governance. While he once admired former Labour Prime Minister Tony Blair’s “live and let live” philosophy, he laments that Starmer’s Labour seems to lack this unifying approach. Instead, Wallace accuses Labour of a politics driven by “envy and division,” governing in a way that favors a select few at the expense of the many. For Wallace, Labour’s policies represent a betrayal of the unity it promised, revealing a government that, in his view, does not truly serve the majority.

 

Based on a report by Daily Telegraph 2024-11-02

 

 

 

[jippytum]

Sosiety is not divided on condeming the sleaze and broken promises by Starmer so soon after the election. 

On that that topic the country is united. 

[Red Forever]

30 minutes ago, jippytum said:

Sosiety is not divided on condeming the sleaze and broken promises by Starmer so soon after the election. 

On that that topic the country is united. 

I define sleaze as handing out multi billion £ contracts to donors and cronies. Baroness Mone anyone?

Feel free to give examples of Labour's sleaze in the first 100 days of their administration.

N.B. Donations which are legally declared don't count as sleaze.

 

More far right drivel from the Torygraph.

[herfiehandbag]

6 minutes ago, Red Forever said:

Donations which are legally declared don't count as sleaze

Suits you sir.

 

Did you see what I did there?

[john donson]

public sector only costs money and red tape paid by the private sector, that pay a lot of taxes for the lazy and illegals

[James105]

5 hours ago, Social Media said:

and the public sector pension liability of more than £2.5 trillion, questioning why Labour has focused so heavily on wages without addressing the “overall package” of benefits public sector workers receive

 

This in a nutshell.   Any public sector pay rises should be paid for by a reduction in pension benefits they receive.  If they want parity with the private sector then give them parity with every aspect including the lack of job security that comes with poor performance.   

 

The public sector is far too large.  At the height of the British empire Britain employed about 40,000 civil servants globally.  This was before the internet, GPS, mobile phones, AI, computers and all the other productivity tools at our disposal today.  The UK government (without needing to manage an empire and with all these tools) today employs about 546,000 people.   

 

If 500,000 of those people disappeared overnight would anyone even notice?  

[Purdey]

The fact that the Conservatives buggered up the whole country and were caught several time means nothing. 

[FruitPudding]

8 minutes ago, Purdey said:

The fact that the Conservatives buggered up the whole country and were caught several time means nothing. 

 

Britain is screwed now that the Communists are in charge.

 

Only Trump can save the West by leading with a good example.