Bungling Andy Burnham has U-turned just hours after pledging compensation vow for so-called ‘Waspi’ women.
The Greater Manchester mayor’s team clarified that he did not support ‘national’ payouts to the pensioners after signalling the huge commitment at Makerfield by-election hustings last night.
The intervention came with markets already nervous about a lurch to the Left as Keir Starmer’s grip on power falters. Debt servicing costs have been rising and Rachel Reeves has already pushed the tax burden towards a record high, while a clamour is growing for more investment in the country’s defence.
Mr Burnham – set to challenge the PM if he wins the Commons contest next Thursday – said he was ‘uncomfortable’ that Labour had U-turned after supporting the Waspi campaign.
Sir Keir was among a host of senior figures who backed compensation over increases in the state pension age when in Opposition.
But in office the premier has rejected demands for compensation from the Women Against State Pension Inequality group, insisting the Government cannot afford the estimated £10billion cost.
Andy Burnham made two potentially huge commitments at hustings for the Makerfield by-election last night
Keir Starmer was among a host of senior figures who backed compensation over increases in the state pension age in Opposition
At Manchester Evening News hustings, Mr Burnham said: ‘I have long supported the campaign and I feel uncomfortable when politicians were all holding up their banner and then got into government and didn’t do anything.
‘So I stick by the campaigns that I support. I stuck by the Hillsborough families and I will stick by the Waspi women because they deserve some recompense for the unfairness.’
The Waspi campaign argues that 3.6million women born in the 1950s were not given adequate warning that their state pension age would rise from 60 to 65, bringing it in line with the pension age for men.
A report by the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO) previously recommended compensation of between £1,000 and £2,950, meaning the total could be more than £10billion.
The PHSO investigation found that while communication of the changes between 1995 and 2004 met the expected standards, the government ought to have carried out a targeted campaign after that date, writing to affected women.
Last night Mr Burnham also criticised the treatment of young people by Westminster, saying they were ‘targeted for cuts’ through the student loans system.
He said: ‘I saw Westminster make young people the target for cuts, most obviously over student loans.
‘And I look at what’s happening, people graduate now, they pay off, well they think they’re paying off, but the loan is actually getting bigger.
‘It’s unbelievable how national politics has treated young people.’
He added: ‘You cannot have a strong society where you make young people the target for cuts, the next generation. You have got to make them the priority for investment.’
Interest rates on student loans have become a major issue in Westminster over the past year, with graduates on the ‘Plan 2’ scheme claiming the loans were mis-sold and calling for an overhaul of the system.
Mr Burnham previously spooked investors by suggesting that the Government should pay less attention to the bond markets, which have pushed up the cost of servicing the country’s debt mountain.
The former Cabinet minister has said the water industry ‘is broken’ and suggested nationalisation is the ultimate answer – despite concerns about the huge cost.
There are signs of a developing Left-wing ‘bidding war’ between rivals hoping to wrestle the keys to Downing Street from Sir Keir.
Wes Streeting has been talking up the prospect of ‘wealth’ taxes, while Mr Burnham has mooted a ‘land value’ tax and revaluing council tax.
That is despite the current Chancellor having already imposed measures raising an extra £75billion annually.
The staggering tally makes Ms Reeves the biggest tax-raiser in the last six decades, far ahead of her nearest competitor for the dubious distinction – Gordon Brown.
The Treasury has been playing hardball over how much money can be allocated to defence, and where it will come from.
As well as a multi-billion pound shortfall in existing military budgets, there are disagreements over how and when targets for increasing spending can be reached.
The Government’s room for manoeuvre is limited after a revolt last year torpedoed efforts to curb spiralling sickness benefits.
It emerged last week that Work and Pensions Secretary Pat McFadden privately complained that Labour MPs only cared about who they can ‘tax in order to pay benefits to others’.
