The Labour Government

[Brewster's millions]

pillar of rectitude this OBR ....strange it seems determined to sabotage our government

I think that’s a strange take, and unfair on the OBR.

It’s debatable whether they deliberately leaked the Budget documents on the morning of Reeves’ speech. It was a pretty tasty way to get one over Reeves if it was done deliberately, but I don’t think it was. The head of the OBR is an experienced, senior former Treasury official and I don’t think he would have sanctioned it given that it would be the end of his career if it were proven that he had done so deliberately. More likely that an inexperienced staff member, not used to dealing with time and market sensitive material, made a mistake.

Other than the early release of the documents on Budget day, I can’t see why they’d be open to criticism, given that they were only doing their jobs in the usual manner.

The problems sit entirely with the behaviour of the Chancellor, the prime minister and other officials within the Treasury. First leaking even the fine detail of the OBR’s annual supply-side appraisal to the press, and then using this to provide a misleading and dishonest impression of the evolution of the OBR’s fiscal forecast overall.

If Reeves had acted honestly and with integrity, and indeed professionally, then none of this would have happened. But both she and Starmer chose to mislead people in order to provide cover for an increase in taxes that would be used to bribe their backbenchers. None of that was the OBR’s doing.

 

[mosssideblue]

I'm just your normal average UK citizen, one of the workers whose not rich but did all the 'right things' in regard to staying within my means, saving for my retirement and being employed since I left school.
So, its a sobering thought that doing the right thing has meant that I will never ever be entitled to any benefits unless my life completely collapses and I literally lose everything down to a point where I drop low enough to qualify - even if I lost my job tomorrow I would not be entitled for anything for a very long time and should I need a care home I would have to lose my house and savings for the pleasure.
The question is, why did I bother?
Some of these jobless, layabout baby factories will have been awarded in a few short years my entire life's worth for doing nothing and they will get free care homes and funerals

Do you have kids? Gift them the house now. God forbid you ever become disabled, but if you do, you will receive benefits then.

Why would you not get benefits if you lost your job?

 

[hcblue95]

Why should there be a GE?

So that abu can get his preferred Reform government I suspect. Who absolutely won't lie.

 

[WRicko]

Do you have kids? Gift them the house now. God forbid you ever become disabled, but if you do, you will receive benefits then.

Why would you not get benefits if you lost your job?

That’s not how it works

 

[mosssideblue]

That’s not how it works

What isn’t?

 

[abu13]

So that abu can get his preferred Reform government I suspect. Who absolutely won't lie.

Haha, Reform are far from the answer. Farage us a ****.

Been a labour supporter all my adult life but i dont recognise this current party.

 

[Vic]

Even if they think Reeves was "economical with the truth", can the Tories explain why they and the RW / billionaire media think she should resign but weren't bothered about Johnson's lies and misleading Parliament (not least over lying to the Queen over prorogation)?

 

[mosssideblue]

Even if they think Reeves was "economical with the truth", can the Tories explain why they and the RW / billionaire media think she should resign but weren't bothered about Johnson's lies and misleading Parliament (not least over lying to the Queen over prorogation)?

Because that was different, obviously

 

[mackenzie]

Because that was different, obviously

So you both excuse the new government of doing similar? Because of what the one before did?
I'm no Tory, and I expected better of this Government. Much better.
Maybe I was simply naive.

 

[WRicko]

What isn’t?

You cannot just gift the house to the kids

 

[mosssideblue]

So you both excuse the new government of doing similar? Because of what the one before did?
I'm no Tory, and I expected better of this Government. Much better.
Maybe I was simply naive.

Really! Didn’t think my post needed a smiley

 

[mosssideblue]

You cannot just gift the house to the kids

Can you not put it into a trust?

 

[Pingu the Penguin]

Do you have kids? Gift them the house now. God forbid you ever become disabled, but if you do, you will receive benefits then.

Why would you not get benefits if you lost your job?

savings presumably

 

[Pingu the Penguin]

I think that’s a strange take, and unfair on the OBR.

It’s debatable whether they deliberately leaked the Budget documents on the morning of Reeves’ speech. It was a pretty tasty way to get one over Reeves if it was done deliberately, but I don’t think it was. The head of the OBR is an experienced, senior former Treasury official and I don’t think he would have sanctioned it given that it would be the end of his career if it were proven that he had done so deliberately. More likely that an inexperienced staff member, not used to dealing with time and market sensitive material, made a mistake.

Other than the early release of the documents on Budget day, I can’t see why they’d be open to criticism, given that they were only doing their jobs in the usual manner.

The problems sit entirely with the behaviour of the Chancellor, the prime minister and other officials within the Treasury. First leaking even the fine detail of the OBR’s annual supply-side appraisal to the press, and then using this to provide a misleading and dishonest impression of the evolution of the OBR’s fiscal forecast overall.

If Reeves had acted honestly and with integrity, and indeed professionally, then none of this would have happened. But both she and Starmer chose to mislead people in order to provide cover for an increase in taxes that would be used to bribe their backbenchers. None of that was the OBR’s doing.

They didn’t leak anything. Some staffer uploaded the report to a webpage early, as you would normally do. It would be properly linked to on site after launch. Sillily tho the URL had the same text as their last one, but with the the month of publication changed to November. Some journo worked it out and found it. Lesson learned for them to generate random URLs for documents

 

[york away to this!]

Can any of you lefties help me out when my business goes bump in the next few weeks?
Where do I get the money the serial claimants get?
How do I survive?
What do I do next?

 

[mackenzie]

savings presumably

Can have as much savings as you want and still claim new JSA contributions based for 6 months, as long as you are looking for work and paid enough of the right type of NI contributions for the 2 tax years prior to the start of the calendar year in which you make the claim.

 

[mackenzie]

Can you not put it into a trust?

I think both can fall under "intentional deprivation of assets"

 

[hcblue95]

Can any of you lefties help me out when my business goes bump in the next few weeks?
Where do I get the money the serial claimants get?
How do I survive?
What do I do next?

How come your business is in trouble?

 

[mosssideblue]

I think both can fall under "intentional deprivation of assets"

I thought ( may be wrong, usually am :)), as long as you live a further 5 years after, then that’s ok?

 

[hilts]

I think both can fall under "intentional deprivation of assets"

Its about £90 a week now isnt it.