Labour's promises of delivering a 'fairer' society are already ringing hollow

Tomorrow marks the first month in power for the government, so it seems appropriate to ask : “What do you think of it so far?” As we are dealing with an administration that has released criminals early and closed down the hugely controversial Rwanda scheme without any viable alternative, and last week decided pensioners could pick up part of the cost of funding some of their ill-judged goals, and the construction of new hospitals was halted, it’s not unreasonable to sense “rubbish” would be the answer from many.

Because troublingly, last week the curtain was partly pulled back, and it revealed a new government firmly entrenched in traditional, old Labour values.

Pensioners, save for those on the bleakest of struggle streets, will lose their winter allowance irrespective of the glaring evidence many of them are caught in a sort of middle ground where they might not actually qualify for the cash, but their need is still acute.

In more instances than not, they have paid into the system for decades, supposedly in the belief they would be looked after wherever possible when they reached retirement age. Not under this Labour government, they won’t.

Additionally, as it was the political party that created the National Health Service, it might have seemed reasonable to expect them to stick to the crucial plan to build 40 new hospitals to beef up our ailing NHS.

Not under this Labour government.

So how does Chancellor Rachel Reeves justify turning her back on such traditional Labour values and institutions?

By trying to pretend she had no sense of the financial Armageddon awaiting her inside Number 11 – and bleating about a £22 billion “black hole”.

But sorry Chancellor, this financial tosh just won’t wash.

During the election campaign Ms Reeves gave an interview, declaring “we’ve got the OBR (Office for Budget Responsibility) now … you don’t need an election to find out about the country’s finances”.

And again during the campaign, the influential Institute for Financial Studies released a projection of a black hole totalling £20billion, close enough someone who supposedly boasts the financial acumen of Ms Reeves to get a clear sign of how the books looked.

And lastly, £9billion of this supposed financial nightmare is of her very own making.

She wasn’t mandated to give above-inflation pay rises to teachers and other public sector workers, nor to agree to a 22 per cent pay hike over two years for junior doctors.

In November last year, when it was floated that cutting pensioners’ fuel allowance could be introduced, a politician called Darren Jones was rightly concerned and challenged then Chancellor Jeremy Hunt in a letter in which he wrote about pensioners being “deeply concerned about such speculation, especially ahead of winter, and anxious that their incomes may be under threat”.

That’s the same Labour MP Darren Jones who is now Chief Secretary to the Treasury and who will go ahead with the plan – despite his apparent misgivings just eight months ago.

Promises from Reeves and Sir Keir Starmer about delivering a “fairer society” are ringing hollow already, as how is it fair to punish pensioners while handing out billions to what are broadly your loudest cheerleaders, public sector workers?