We Will Always Look After You

Since Twizzler Lansley's mugging of the NHS has yet to make its attrition truly felt among the undeserving vulnerable, it is anticipated that, for the foreseeable future, proles will continue to indulge in the inconsiderate longevity which has done so much damage to our market forces. Given the urgency of the situation, it was perhaps inevitable that the Government would put off doing anything about it until next year, when optimists hope that the Chancellor will have got a few sums right at last, or that in any event the problem will have been reduced by the value of a few hypothermia cases and self-immolations. There are rumours that the Government has "agreed in principle to" (in Standard English, proclaimed the regrettable impossibility of) raising the limit of money people are allowed to have before they are forced to rely on their offspring or the private sector; the New Labour drone Randy Burnham has dismissed this as an empty gesture, and he ought to know. Meanwhile, the Treasury has extruded a spokesbeing to deny that the empty gesture has been vetoed by the Chancellor: "It is completely untrue that we have blocked anything," said the spokesbeing indignantly. "We have not even been in the talks." At the moment, it would appear, George the Progressively Regressive is not even trusted sufficiently to be included in the negotiations about how to prevent care of the elderly from gobbling up too much of the next round of tax cuts.