It’s official: Andy Burnham wants to cut your pension.
Politics is about choices and, on Tuesday, the Prime Minister decided to pick on OAPs. He demanded that they be the first to make sacrifices to fund the profligacy of others.
He did not pick on the illegal immigrants in hotels. Not the people on benefits who choose not to work. Not the Net Zero scammers fleecing taxpayers with speculative technology. Not even the barmy foreign aid schemes in countries richer than our own.
No, instead he singled out the pensioners who have worked hard and paid in for their entire lives and placed them in the firing line.
For some reason, Burnham thinks a weekly income of £240 is simply too extravagant for the elderly. It’s just plain mean. And for a party that once proudly represented working people, it’s a betrayal.
The triple lock has long been a pet peeve of both Labour and Tory MPs. Jeremy Hunt, Torsten Bell, Jess Phillips, Liam Byrne - they’ve all called for it to go. This consensus has all the hallmarks of the failed Westminster parties.
But I’ll confess, I didn’t think any of them would be stupid enough to change it like this. I thought the burden would at least be shared. But no. Pensioners were the only people Burnham was prepared to target in his speech.
The next Reform manifesto will keep the triple lock for the whole of the next Parliament.
My fear is that it gets even worse for pensioners. Burnham said he was being honest about what his social care plans will cost.
But he didn’t say there was a gaping black hole in his numbers.
Cutting the state pension as he suggests will save about £3.6 billion by 2033. That will only get him 20% of what he needs for a national care service. He’ll need £17 billion more in taxes.
Coincidentally, £17 billion is the same amount as levying a 10% death tax on every person who dies. That’s what Burnham first proposed 15 years ago when he was a second-rate health secretary.
That tax would hit every family, not just the wealthiest. And it would cover even the most incidental forms of wealth.
Your mother’s wedding ring, any silver cutlery, cars, clothes. Each and every one of these items would be priced up, and HMRC would take a 10% cut.
The most private moments of family grief, intruded upon by a knock at the door from an HMRC inspector.
That’s the double whammy coming round the corner for pensioners. First he’ll cut your pension, then he’ll tax what’s left when you pass away.
Reform will make different choices. We’ll be on your side instead.
We’ve identified £80 billion in savings - 13 times as much as abolishing the triple lock saves. That means we can afford to keep it and raise the tax-free personal allowance to £15,000.
Migrant benefits? All gone. They should only be available to British citizens. If you come to this country, you contribute and enrich the British people - if not, you should leave. That will save us £22 billion.
Boriswave migrants getting indefinite leave to remain? Denied. Averting this fiscal time bomb could save up to £600 billion in the long run.
Foreign aid? Scrapped. And Net Zero subsidies? Slashed. Illegal immigrants? Kicked out of hotels and deported to where they came from.
We’ve chosen to do the opposite of Burnham. We’ll protect pensioners by cutting the waste spent on those who have exploited our generosity and on vanity projects cooked up by useless politicians.
That’s because we’re on your side. The British people’s side. Grafters, not grifters. People who’ve paid in and kept our country going through the tough times.
Nigel Farage and I will fight this dual assault on our pensioners with all our might. We won’t let Labour win.
(This is a slightly edited version of an article published in the Telegraph on 30th September.)
Politics is about choices and, on Tuesday, the Prime Minister decided to pick on OAPs. He demanded that they be the first to make sacrifices to fund the profligacy of others.
He did not pick on the illegal immigrants in hotels. Not the people on benefits who choose not to work. Not the Net Zero scammers fleecing taxpayers with speculative technology. Not even the barmy foreign aid schemes in countries richer than our own.
No, instead he singled out the pensioners who have worked hard and paid in for their entire lives and placed them in the firing line.
For some reason, Burnham thinks a weekly income of £240 is simply too extravagant for the elderly. It’s just plain mean. And for a party that once proudly represented working people, it’s a betrayal.
The triple lock has long been a pet peeve of both Labour and Tory MPs. Jeremy Hunt, Torsten Bell, Jess Phillips, Liam Byrne - they’ve all called for it to go. This consensus has all the hallmarks of the failed Westminster parties.
But I’ll confess, I didn’t think any of them would be stupid enough to change it like this. I thought the burden would at least be shared. But no. Pensioners were the only people Burnham was prepared to target in his speech.
The next Reform manifesto will keep the triple lock for the whole of the next Parliament.
My fear is that it gets even worse for pensioners. Burnham said he was being honest about what his social care plans will cost.
But he didn’t say there was a gaping black hole in his numbers.
Cutting the state pension as he suggests will save about £3.6 billion by 2033. That will only get him 20% of what he needs for a national care service. He’ll need £17 billion more in taxes.
Coincidentally, £17 billion is the same amount as levying a 10% death tax on every person who dies. That’s what Burnham first proposed 15 years ago when he was a second-rate health secretary.
That tax would hit every family, not just the wealthiest. And it would cover even the most incidental forms of wealth.
Your mother’s wedding ring, any silver cutlery, cars, clothes. Each and every one of these items would be priced up, and HMRC would take a 10% cut.
The most private moments of family grief, intruded upon by a knock at the door from an HMRC inspector.
That’s the double whammy coming round the corner for pensioners. First he’ll cut your pension, then he’ll tax what’s left when you pass away.
Reform will make different choices. We’ll be on your side instead.
We’ve identified £80 billion in savings - 13 times as much as abolishing the triple lock saves. That means we can afford to keep it and raise the tax-free personal allowance to £15,000.
Migrant benefits? All gone. They should only be available to British citizens. If you come to this country, you contribute and enrich the British people - if not, you should leave. That will save us £22 billion.
Boriswave migrants getting indefinite leave to remain? Denied. Averting this fiscal time bomb could save up to £600 billion in the long run.
Foreign aid? Scrapped. And Net Zero subsidies? Slashed. Illegal immigrants? Kicked out of hotels and deported to where they came from.
We’ve chosen to do the opposite of Burnham. We’ll protect pensioners by cutting the waste spent on those who have exploited our generosity and on vanity projects cooked up by useless politicians.
That’s because we’re on your side. The British people’s side. Grafters, not grifters. People who’ve paid in and kept our country going through the tough times.
Nigel Farage and I will fight this dual assault on our pensioners with all our might. We won’t let Labour win.
(This is a slightly edited version of an article published in the Telegraph on 30th September.)
