Labour's Pledge - Now I know they've lost

I received the latest newsletter from Labour as part of the general election campaign and it has provoked me to take to my blog again, even though I had no intention of writing today.

I have a lot of work to do over the next couple of weeks but really, it is my duty to point a few things out to the people of Ipswich and beyond.

Let's take the front pages;

Labour will;
Balance the Books - now that's enough to make anyone choke on their muesli in the morning and I can't believe the affront of these people. Do the designers and marketing team have a really good laugh when composing these things back at Labour HQ?
Did they look it up first to see what it meant - Hey guys, balance the books? Anyone know how many books on our heads we are promising to balance while we talk a good talk?

Better wages - okay so that good old platitude - better - because everyone falls for that don't they? How will the wages be better - perhaps they mean give them a few years and we will be paid in Euros, if they have their way. Is that better?  Or perhaps they mean they will make those horrible businesses who dare to think of dirty words like profit and shareholders pay more for their staff irrespective of the going rate or the quality of workmanship. Labour have proved themselves to be a total disaster just talking about business, never mind poking their nose in.
Labour and Mr Cruddas - Mind your own business first eh?

Back the next generation - Another platitude and because, of course, Tories don't have children do they? so why would they want to back the next generation?  I mean, not only have we set up the best apprenticeship system this country has seen for decades (yes sorry Milliband, we got there before you but then your head is so far up your own..) but we have also helped so many back into work with youth unemployment reaching an all time low.
They will have you believe that these new jobs are zero contract or part time, but this is just UNTRUE. Most jobs are full time. They constantly tell lies and at best are disingenuous.

Freeze energy bills - Yes folks they have actually repeated it. If they'd have been in power we would have had our energy bills frozen at the optimum level, just before they decreased. They are useless at predicting the future, just as they were when they sold off all our gold at rock bottom prices. They are the part that just keep giving and then Bill Somebody (Eh, Mr Balls?).

Cut tax with a low 10p starting rate - OH MY WORD!
Not only did they scrap this level before they thankfully left government BUT we have replaced it with 0, yes 0 tax by upping the allowance by a generous amount. What planet are they on - it simply beggars belief that people would fall for this.
Jam tomorrow made from last years rotting fruit methinks...

Take the next soundbite on their literature - this is such a total untruth it almost makes me feel sorry for their desperation. Apparently;-

People are now £1600 worse off a year - This figure is just plucked from the backsides of those that failed their maths GCSE and furthermore, it does not take into account the raise in tax allowance.

Of course we're a little worse off but we are on the road to recovery - abled again only by a conservative led government - just as we have had to do before, following a labour legacy.

I can understand the die hards (the forever labour voters who stand by this shambles of a party) if you sign up to their core values - like equal outcomes, nanny state, co-sign on victimhood, large state, envy politics but if they really asked themselves the hard questions like - how about thinking in terms of equal opportunities, small state, self responsibility, co-sign on survivorhood - ooh and thinking of Ed as our prime minister and how the Greek government on the far left are going to fail their country miserably over the next few months, then common sense must surely prevail?

I'm keeping this manifesto of theirs - I think it's the moment they lost the battle of the words and credibility - vote for them at OUR peril...

And as far as Ipswich is concerned there really is only one man for the job - the one that's been doing it brilliantly for nearly 5 years and with another term will show this country and our young people that this party is the one that has the long term view of prosperity, even if we have to give a bit of tough love,

Labour in chaos - Part 1 - Labours Top 5 Rebuttal errors

Labour’s rebuttal – top 5 errors

·         Labour hope to run the country, but they don’t even know who their own shadow minsters are!

     

      Labour’s rebuttal says: ‘The Tories have used a quote from a backbench peer…The Tories quote Lord Rosser, a backbench Labour Peer’. But Lord Rosser has been on the Labour frontbench since 2010 (Labour Party, The Tories’ Smear Analysis of Labour Party Policy, 5 January 2015, p.25; Parliament website, accessed 5 January 2015, link).

·         Labour’s own rebuttal confuses a million with a billion – three times. 

    ‘The Tories say that a commitment to support UnionLearn for the Duration of the Parliament means that we will increase its funding from £15.3 billion [sic] to £21.5 billion [sic]’; ‘According to the Tories, this policy would cost nothing in 2015/16 but new election costs would be £85.7 billion [sic]’ (Labour Party, The Tories’ Smear Analysis of Labour Party Policy, 5 January 2015, p.14).

·         Labour accept HM Treasury’s costings when it suits them, but refuse when the costings reveal they have got their numbers wrong. 

     ‘This costing [restricting pension tax relief for higher earners] raises more than we had expected and we will ensure that the revenue comes in as soon as possible’; ‘Treasury costings have been done on the basis of Tory advisers’ assumptions’ (Labour Party, The Tories’ Smear Analysis of Labour Party Policy, 5 January 2015, p.34 and p.3).

·         Labour say they want the OBR to cost their manifesto, but they won’t accept their costings when it doesn’t suit them. 

     Labour claim: ‘According to the Tories, Labour's policy of restoring the 50p rate of income tax will not raise any revenue because it would be offset by reductions in VAT’; but it is the OBR and HMRC’s analysis that shows this policy wouldn’t raise money (Labour Party, The Tories’ Smear Analysis of Labour Party Policy, 5 January 2015, p.34 and p.34; HMRC, The Exchequer effect of the 50 per cent additional rate of income tax, March 2012; HM Treasury, Budget 2013, Table 2.2, March 2013).

·         Labour want to have it both ways when it comes to whether their published reports constitute a commitment. 

    When Lord Adonis – a senior Shadow Minister – recommends something in a report it’s not their policy: ‘this [University Technical Colleges] is a recommendation from Andrew Adonis’ Growth Review and is not Labour Party policy and will not be in our manifesto’. But when they want to prove something about their policy, Labour are happy to reference a report by a former Minister who hasn’t been on their frontbench for nearly ten years: ‘We have been clear that our policy would be funded from within existing resources…David Blunkett report for Labour’s Policy Review’ (Labour Party, The Tories’ Smear Analysis of Labour Party Policy, 5 January 2015, p.4 and p. 17).