Hunt, the Chancellor, gets his figures wrong!

I can't help feeling that this discussion is purely academic. Hunt won't be Chancellor for much longer and the tories face wipeout whatever they do to try to bribe the electorate.

Whitewavemark2

Well promising to retain something already in existence is hardly imaginative policy. But they have to find votes from somewhere, and I seem to remember that it didn’t stop them from reducing the increase a couple of years ago, even though they had promised to retain the triple lock in their last manifesto.

There was such annoyance over the reduction that they didn’t try it again -especially leading up to the election.

But Tories don’t tell the truth so I would think their manifesto was not worth the paper it was written on, unless it benefited the wealthy.

... and I seem to remember that it didn’t stop them from reducing the increase a couple of years ago, even though they had promised to retain the triple lock in their last manifesto.

Ah, but they possibly thought they didn't need our vote at that time, but as their support is dwindling among the electorate, I think they might have changed their minds.

It sounds rather mercenary to say these things - I'm aware that by comparison with some less affluent societies, we're not too badly off, but it's the ethics that bother me.

There's also the matter of elderly care when we reach that stage where we need it, and it's an issue that has not been addressed... I mean the whole shebang - elderly and often unwell spouses caring for their other half with complex needs; care homes charging what appear to be exorbitant fees, etc, etc.

In that light, the triple-lock promise (already in place anyway) seems like a bribe.

And of course, it can just as easily be removed - it can become "unaffordable", so I feel we're at the mercy of a government casting around for votes, certainly not one that is concerned about the long-term welfare of pensioners.

I wish. Whitewavemark2🤣

Mr Hunt finds it difficult to manage on £100000 a year, so I expect he will look with horror at the pension, and give us a magnificent rise!

Well promising to retain something already in existence is hardly imaginative policy. But they have to find votes from somewhere, and I seem to remember that it didn’t stop them from reducing the increase a couple of years ago, even though they had promised to retain the triple lock in their last manifesto.

There was such annoyance over the reduction that they didn’t try it again -especially leading up to the election.

But Tories don’t tell the truth so I would think their manifesto was not worth the paper it was written on, unless it benefited the wealthy.

Yes Dickens...Hunt has just conveniently forgotten to mention that his pension rise is putting many pensioners into paying tax for the first time since retirement. Funny that isn't it.

Calendargirl

Well, he confirmed that the Conservatives are putting the pensions triple lock in the manifesto.

Of course - they obviously still need the 'grey' vote.

It will put more pensioners into the tax bracket, too.

Sort of giving with one hand whilst the other is fumbling around in your back pocket to take some of it back again!

he may have created the jobs, but many didn't last very long.

Well, he confirmed that the Conservatives are putting the pensions triple lock in the manifesto.

Indeed. He said the Tories had created 4 million jobs since 2010, 8000 jobs for every working day since they had been in office.

Assuming he's talking about a seven day working week -
Fourteen years is 5110 days give or take a leap year - call it 5000 which is 800 not 8000.