Member Info for Dorfan

ASI,

Labour announced welfare reforms intended to save about £5 billion a year by tightening eligibility for some disability and health-related benefits, particularly PIP and parts of Universal Credit.

The original savings estimate was quickly revised down. The Office for Budget Responsibility assessed the package as saving around £3.4 billion, not the £5 billion initially hoped for.

A large Labour backbench rebellion forced major concessions and partial U-turns. Existing claimants were protected, some Universal Credit changes were softened, and the most controversial PIP restrictions were delayed or dropped.

As a result, the projected savings were more than halved, with the Institute for Fiscal Studies estimating the package would save about £2.5 billion rather than £5.5 billion by 2029–30.

After further concessions, some analysts concluded the net savings could effectively disappear altogether.

ITV reported a £4.8 billion hole opened up by the U-turns, while the IFS and Resolution Foundation argued the reforms might generate little or no net fiscal saving over the relevant period.

88, Trouble feels depressed, does he not realise how depressed we are with his continual snide, rude and offensive remarks he makes to other forum members.

Is Lloyds share price being held back by the government’s lack of investment in growth in this country?

If we could see real growth could we see a share price up in the 120’s?

As it goes now I don’t see any real movement forward for Lloyds with the share price for at least three years or more.

In messages to minister Pat McFadden in May 2025, Mandelson said Starmer's team "don't think [the PM] knows what he wants" and suggested government needed a "complete revamp"

Well that tells us nothing new, it just proves what a shambles this government is in, a total mess.

Streeting talking about cuts to NI contributions to help the younger generation, total opposite to Starmer and Reeves direction.

PIP claims increasing at a fast pace, currently at around 4 million, costing £26B and looking to rise to £41B by the end of the decade. Who is paying for this, yes, the pensioners will be a potential target, possibly higher IHT to come, reduced state pension might be on the cards. Next they will consider adding NI to private pensions. They will just tax us the pensioners until we have nothing more to give. They are in such a mess I suspect everything is on the table, nothing is potentially safe anymore.

Food prices look likely to increase by 9% at end of this year. Starmers EU food reset will add further costs over next two years as new regulations come in.

Things can only get ‘worse’ (and worse and worse)

STP, you posted a while ago you had me blocked, well that was a lie then, wasn’t it?

In a highly critical essay, external, Sir Tony said measures including increasing employers National Insurance, new workers' rights laws and phasing out of the British oil and gas industry had held back business.

Sir Tony's intervention comes as the PM faces a potential leadership challenge following a disastrous set of election results and ministerial resignations.

Sir Tony, who came to power in 1997 and won two further general elections, argued a change of leader was "irrelevant if it doesn't start with a policy debate".

In his essay of more than 5,600 words - his first in-depth critique of Sir Keir's government - Sir Tony argued the "principal problem" was not "Keir's personality" or "a failure to communicate 'our achievements'".

He wrote: "It is because we don't have a worked-out coherent plan for the country in a fast-changing world and are in the wrong political position from which we can devise one and win a second term."

It’s like flogging a dead donkey, if it’s already dead, bury it and get a new one.

ASI

I knew all of that already, but I am sure some others will find it interesting

Morrisons is planning to close 100 stores over the coming months, as it blamed government policy choices for rising costs.

Good old Labour, 14 years planning to make monumental changes and it has fallen flat on its face.

No change as usual.

Did Lloyds hit 100p today?

I must have missed it, blink at it has gone!

ASI, an interesting reply, took 12 lines to say what I said in two and you went off at a tangent as well.

The UK government borrowed more than expected last month, hitting the highest level for April since the Covid pandemic in 2020, the latest official figures show.

The difference between spending and income from taxes, was £24.3bn last month, £4.9bn higher than at the same point last year, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) said.

The figure was also higher than the £20.9bn that had been predicted by the government's independent forecaster, the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR).

ONS chief economist Grant Fitzner said April's borrowing figure was "substantially higher" than a year earlier, with higher tax receipts being "more than offset by higher spending on benefits and other costs".

The figures showed spending by government on benefits rose by £2.7bn from the same point last year, which the ONS said was largely caused by inflation-linked increases to many benefits.

ASI

Data from a Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) Freedom of Information request, analysed by LCP, indicates that removing the pension triple lock would increase the number of people facing retirement poverty from 4.6 million to 11.7 million over their lifetimes. This analysis suggests that altering the triple lock policy would result in a significant surge in pensioner poverty. You can read the full analysis at DWP's official records.

ASI, we all know the triple lock is on a knife edge, Labour said it would be protected for this governments term, it did not say it would keep it after then. We have also seen them recently hinting at wanting to scrap it early (Labour inner circles), so either way, poverty without it will be soon if they have it scrapped or later in a few years.

Which means there will be poverty for pensioners at some point under Labour.

ASI, and while you raised the issue regarding the state pension which involves the triple lock, here are some figures to mull over and then we can see why pensioners in the future don’t have a rosy future.

Impact of Scrapping the Triple Lock

7.1 million more people:

A November 2025 freedom of information analysis by pension consultancy LCP found that removing the triple lock would increase the number of workers facing retirement poverty from 4.6 million to 11.7 million over their lifetimes.

4.4 million more people: Leading think-tank discussions in May 2026 suggest that dropping the triple lock immediately could cause the pensioner poverty rate to rise from under 20% to over 50%, dragging millions of current retirees below the line.

Impact of Increased Pensioner Wealth TaxesAsset-rich, cash-poor risk:

Organisations like the Resolution Foundation advocate for taxing wealthy retirees to support younger generations.

However, if wealth taxes are levied on home equity or savings without high exemptions, "asset-rich, cash-poor" pensioners could be forced into poverty due to lack of liquid income.

The "Fiscal Drag" effect: Even without a new wealth tax, the freezing of the income tax personal allowance means normal pension growth will pull millions of basic retirees into the 20% tax bracket by 2027, effectively reducing their disposable income.

ASI, you are still not seeing and understanding my original post, you have gone off at a tangent and lost the plot

ASI

“ As a side note, "fit notes" (sick notes) are strictly an issue for the working-age population to manage economic inactivity; they have no direct operational or budgetary crossover with the 12.7 million people already at State Pension age.”

I never said there was a direct correlation, I said “as an example” meaning the money taken from pensioners is used elsewhere, and in this current government’s climate fit notes can be one area.

ASI

Your AI response certainly got things mixed up on what I said and made assumptions I actually didn’t say. It might be a good idea to proof read a reply before posting it.

88

“ Dorf (sorry about shortening your username)”

I forgot to say, I’m sure you won’t get into any trouble over it, especially from me, we don’t want anyone to be accused of being trouble makers now, do we?

88

That’s OK 88, I am not so precious as others here are, Dorf or even DF is fine by me.

The current government I believe see pensioners as a legitimate cash cow to milk to the bitter end. Yes, there are some wealthy pensioners but there are a lot with modest investments and these are just being nibbled away to make life harder for them.

They forget that with these modest savings, pensioners go out and spend, if that is inhibited then the retailers will lose out, they are so short sighted.