Corbyn has spoken There is no virus its all a hoax

BoroFur

Well-known member
#82
I cant see any calculations for the £58 billion additional costs of promising to refund the WASPI pensions during the election campaign. Correct me if i am wrong though
Cooper won't see this because he's blocked me. £58 billion is the correct number but it was to be paid in instalments over 5 years. It wasn't part of Labour's grey book costing exercise because it wasn't categorized as regular spending. It was coming out of contingencies that all governments have. Would it result in extra borrowing? Probably but when you need to do the right thing that's what you do yes?
 
#83
Cooper won't see this because he's blocked me. £58 billion is the correct number but it was to be paid in instalments over 5 years. It wasn't part of Labour's grey book costing exercise because it wasn't categorized as regular spending. It was coming out of contingencies that all governments have. Would it result in extra borrowing? Probably but when you need to do the right thing that's what you do yes?
 

SuperStu

Well-known member
#84
I cant see any calculations for the £58 billion additional costs of promising to refund the WASPI pensions during the election campaign. Correct me if i am wrong though
You also won't find the WASPI pensions in the manifesto document.

Fully agree that it was a bad way to announce policy if that's what you're getting round to - on the hoof during an election campaign.

But if your point is that the manifesto either didn't have a costings doc, or that the costings doc should have included policies not in the manifesto, it did and that doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
 
Last edited:

Cooper671

Well-known member
#85
You also won't find the WASPI pensions in the manifesto document.

Fully agree that it was a bad way to announce policy if that's what you're getting round to - on the hoof during an election campaign.

But if your point is that the manifesto either didn't have a costings doc, or that the costings doc should have included policies not in the manifesto, it did and that doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
I know their was costings and i agree it was fully costed at the start of the campaign. To announce policies of upto £58 billion during the campaign then the total policies on offer arent fully costed.

As per BF message (i have seen it) i agree doing the right thing is correct. I would wonder why it hardly gets a mention in the manifesto but suddenly its a huge policy. I dont believe it was well planned out, it was made on the back of Johnsons comment that they wouldnt be able to compensate.

Also report below states it wouldnt benefit a number of pensioners and even make the poorest worse

offhttps://www.newstatesman.com/politi...s-waspi-policy-wont-benefit-poorer-pensioners
 
#86
I know their was costings and i agree it was fully costed at the start of the campaign. To announce policies of upto £58 billion during the campaign then the total policies on offer arent fully costed.

As per BF message (i have seen it) i agree doing the right thing is correct. I would wonder why it hardly gets a mention in the manifesto but suddenly its a huge policy. I dont believe it was well planned out, it was made on the back of Johnsons comment that they wouldnt be able to compensate.

Also report below states it wouldnt benefit a number of pensioners and even make the poorest worse

offhttps://www.newstatesman.com/politi...s-waspi-policy-wont-benefit-poorer-pensioners
“Once they get into retirement, if they're receiving [Waspi compensation] every year for five years, that would to some degree wipe out eligibility for means-tested benefits,” says Daniela Silcock, head of policy research at the Pensions Policy Institute."

I'm sure most people would prefer the indignity of means tested benefits.
 
Top
X