The Austerity Switch: The Disappearing Act of Labour’s Promises

Remember when the Red Tories attacked the Blue Tories over the injustice of taking away Winter Fuel Payments

We find ourselves in the curious position of watching a Labour government don the moth-eaten cloak of austerity. You might have thought such garments had been consigned to the dustbin of history once a Labour government got in, but it seems Sir Keir Starmer and his merry band have been rummaging through the Tory dressing-up box.

The decision to cut the winter fuel allowance for pensioners is a masterstroke of political sleight of hand. Had this been the work of our Conservative friends, we’d no doubt be witnessing a spectacle of righteous indignation from the Labour faithful. The streets of Westminster would be awash with placards and the air thick with chants of “Tory scum!” But lo and behold, when it’s their own side wielding the axe, these self-same crusaders for social justice suddenly develop a keen interest in the intricate art of fiscal responsibility.

What we’re witnessing, dear reader, is nothing short of a neoliberal bait-and-switch of the highest order. The Labour Party, once the proud standard-bearer of the working class, has transformed into a pale imitation of its supposed adversaries. It’s as if we’ve been sold a Ferrari only to find a Ford Fiesta with a fancy paint job sitting in our driveway.

The Mental Gymnastics of Labour’s Faithful: A Spectacle of Hypocrisy

Oh, what a sight to behold! The contortions of Labour supporters as they attempt to justify their party’s sudden embrace of austerity would put even the most accomplished circus acrobats to shame. It’s a performance worthy of the grandest stages, this spectacular display of cognitive dissonance.

Just months ago, these very same individuals were howling with righteous indignation at the mere suggestion of means-testing the winter fuel allowance. They decried it as an attack on the vulnerable, a Tory plot to freeze pensioners in their homes. Now, with their own party wielding the axe, they’ve developed a newfound appreciation for the nuances of fiscal policy.

“Those with more should get less,” they parrot, as if they’ve just discovered the concept of progressive taxation. But let’s not mince words: this is nothing more than tribalism dressed up as principle. It’s the political equivalent of defending the indefensible simply because it’s your team committing the foul.

This slippery slope of justification is indeed a dangerous path. It’s the first step towards the kind of blind loyalty that breeds fascism. Today, it’s the winter fuel allowance. Tomorrow, who knows what sacred cow will be led to the slaughter in the name of ‘fiscal responsibility’?

The doublethink on display is truly Orwellian. These Labour loyalists, who once railed against the cruelty of austerity, now find themselves cheerleaders for the very policies they opposed. It’s as if they’ve been issued a new edition of the Newspeak dictionary, where ‘protecting the vulnerable’ now means ‘cutting their benefits’.

Remember when the Red Tories attacked the Blue Tories over the injustice of taking Winter Fuel Payments away from Pensioners at PMQs? Oh, how the tables have turned! It seems the view from the government benches has a curious way of altering one’s perspective.

This is not accountability. This is not principled governance. This is the triumph of party loyalty over moral consistency. It’s a betrayal not just of Labour’s supposed principles, but of the very concept of opposition in a democracy.

To those Labour supporters tying themselves in knots to defend this policy: have you no shame? Have you forgotten so quickly the arguments you made when it was the other side proposing such measures? Your hypocrisy is not just disappointing; it’s dangerous.

This is how democracies die: not with a bang, but with the whimper of supporters making excuses for their leaders’ betrayals. It’s a slippery slope indeed, greased with the oil of political expediency and the sweat of mental gymnastics.

In the end, what we’re witnessing is not just the death of a policy, but the erosion of political integrity. It’s a sad spectacle, watching the party of the working class become indistinguishable from its supposed opposition. But perhaps saddest of all is the willingness of its supporters to go along for the ride, cheerfully waving their flags as the ship of social democracy slowly sinks beneath the waves of neoliberal orthodoxy.

But let’s not mince words: this decision to means-test the winter fuel allowance is nothing short of a betrayal. It’s a slap in the face to every pensioner who dared to believe that their twilight years might be marked by dignity rather than destitution. And what’s the magic number that separates the deserving from the undeserving poor? A princely sum of £11,344 per annum. One can almost hear Rachel Reeves whispering, “Let them eat cake – but only if they’re truly starving.”

This in a country that already boasts one of the worst state pensions in Europe. It’s as if we’re in a race to the bottom, and Labour has decided to strap on rocket boosters. We should be pushing for better pensions, not justifying reductions in benefits. But no, in this topsy-turvy world of Labour logic, the solution to poverty is apparently to create more of it.

This is not merely a policy misstep; it’s a moral failure of the highest order. It’s a grim reminder that in the game of political musical chairs, it’s always the vulnerable who are left without a seat when the music stops

The irony comes when we drag out of the memory hole Labour’s position on the winter fuel allowance only a few months ago…

One law for him, and one for the rest of us?

Only two months ago Starmer stood at the dispatch box during PMQs as the opposition leader condemning the Tories, berating them in suggesting they would scrap the winter fuel allowance. How swiftly the political winds change!

But let us not forget the pearls of wisdom that fell from his lips during that fateful exchange. We learned of the mythical £46 billion black hole, a figure that seems to have been plucked from the same realm of fantasy where politicians’ promises reside. More importantly, we were granted a glimpse into the curious world of political pensions.

For lo and behold, our noble knight of the realm, Sir Keir, possesses a pension scheme so exalted it required its own act of parliament. The Pensions Increase (Pension Scheme for Keir Starmer QC) Regulations 2013 stands as a monument to political self-interest, a gilded safety net woven from the threads of legislative privilege. It’s a masterpiece of self-preservation, ensuring that while the rest of us mere mortals must weather the storms of economic uncertainty, Sir Keir’s golden years are as protected as the Crown Jewels.

One law for him, and one for the rest of us? It seems the phrase “we’re all in this together” has a rather flexible definition

This truly is a Duopoly where the pantomime is just for show, a grand theatre of the absurd played out on the stage of Westminster.

The Labour Party’s promises, much like those of their Tory counterparts, have the longevity of frost on a spring morning – glittering briefly in the dawn light before melting away under the harsh glare of political reality. These broken pledges litter the landscape of British politics like so many discarded manifestos, each one a testament to the ephemeral nature of electoral commitment.

From nationalising key industries to abolishing tuition fees, from protecting the NHS to safeguarding workers’ rights, the list of Labour’s abandoned promises reads like a catalogue of shattered dreams. In this grim farce, the only consistent performance seems to be the party’s ability to disappoint those who dared to hope for genuine change. As we survey this wreckage of broken faith, one can’t help but wonder: is this the price of power, or simply the inevitable result of a system where the difference between opposition and government is merely a matter of which bench one sits on?

Promises, Promises

It’s not just Starmer that broke his promise Deputy PM Angela Rayner has also previously tweeted: ‘Labour will protect ‘triple-lock’ on state pensions, maintain the Winter Fuel Allowance & free bus passes for pensioners.’

Labour will protect 'triple-lock’ on state pensions, maintain the Winter Fuel Allowance&free bus passes for pensioners #BattleForNumber10

— Angela Rayner (@AngelaRayner) May 29, 2017

And in November last year, her now deputy in the Treasury, Darren Jones, wrote to the-Chancellor Jeremy Hunt as he prepared the autumn Budget, demanding a promise that no pensioner would be stripped of their winter fuel payment.

‘The Paymaster General has suggested stripping some older people of the Winter Fuel Payment,’ Mr Jones wrote. ‘Pensioners mustn’t be forced to bear the brunt of Tory economic failure.’

Dennis Reed, director of campaign group Silver Voices, said: ‘It’s hypocritical. But unfortunately, it’s what we currently expect from most politicians and why we don’t trust them anymore.

Of course, the chancellor, Rachel Revees while in opposition used the winter allowance as a sacred cow that must not be forsaken. Funny how quickly she moved on that one…

Axing most winter fuel payments would break Tory manifesto promise, says Labour, after reports PM considering option

Labour has said Rishi Sunak will be breaking a manifesto promise if reports that he is planning to remove the winter fuel allowance from all but the poorest pensioners are accurate.

Rachel Reeves, while the shadow chancellor, said that a better policy would to increase the scope of the windfall tax on energy companies which have seen profits soar since the invasion of Ukraine.

According to Sky News, at the time they stated Sunak was considering removing the winter fuel allowance – worth between £250 and £600 this winter – from most pensioners. Under this proposal only the poorest, on pension credit, would still receive it, Sky reports.

Asked for her reaction to the story, Reeves said the Conservatives promised in their last manifesto to keep the triple lock and the winter fuel payment. She said:

“These were commitments that the Conservatives gave to older people at the last election in their manifesto, and they should not be breaking those commitments.”

“One thing that I would be doing if I was chancellor today would be to have a proper windfall tax on the huge profits that the big energy giants are making and use that money to help people with their bills, older people and families too.”

“That is a choice that the Conservatives could make. That is a choice that they’ve failed to make.”

On that she is right this is a political choice, not a necessity…

But perhaps we shouldn’t be surprised. After all, this is the party that once promised us a new Jerusalem. It turns out they meant the old one. They meant support for a state that occupies Palestine and the West Bank committing genocide along the way. Instead, we get a Labour Party content to offer us a timeshare in Toryland.

So here we are, watching as the winter fuel allowance is sacrificed on the altar of fiscal responsibility. One can only imagine the chill that will creep into the bones of our nation’s pensioners as they realise that the party of the workers has decided they can do without a little warmth in their twilight years.

But again, what’s fascinating in this funny old world is when Labour supporters find themselves defending policies they would have decried as cruel and heartless mere months ago. But then, perhaps that’s the price of power in our brave new world of political shape-shifting. One thing’s for certain: if this is socialism, then I’m a Tory peer.

To those who cast their votes for Labour, believing they were ushering in an era of genuine change, the bitter taste of reality must be setting in. The wolf in sheep’s clothing has shed its disguise, revealing a creature all too familiar to those of us who’ve long observed the political circus.

The truth is we stand witness to a grand charade, a political pantomime where the actors may change but the script remains depressingly familiar. The Labour Party faithful, bless their cotton socks, contort themselves into knots trying to justify this betrayal of principles. Meanwhile, energy companies, those great leviathans of capitalism, continue to gorge themselves on the misery of the masses, their profits soaring as the cost of living crisis deepens.

One can’t help but wonder: had Labour and Sir Keir kept their original promises to nationalise energy, might we have avoided this sorry spectacle entirely? The winter fuel allowance might have been rendered unnecessary, a relic of a time when we allowed private interests to plunder our resources and profit from basic necessities. But alas, such radical thinking seems beyond the pale for our current crop of ‘progressive’ leaders.

In this grand theatre of the absurd, the tragedy is not just the broken promises or the abandoned principles. It’s the crushing of hope, the slow death of the belief that real change is possible through our current political system. And as the curtain falls on this act, one can only wonder what fresh disappointments await in the next scene of Britain’s ongoing political farce.