Your reporter Peter Lazenby raised bias in the media at the press launch of the Labour manifesto. (“A Manifesto for the many,” Morning Star, 17 May; http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/a-1294-A-Manifesto-for-the-Many#.WRxAAOSGOM8)
Yet the very first line of your report by your Parliamentary reporter on the manifesto contents repeats without question Labour’s assertion it is “fully costed.”
But It demonstrably is not on the issues of the renewal of the £205,000,000,000 (£205 bn) Trident nuclear WMDs system and nuclear power support through taxpayer subsidies.
Labour’s manifesto gives no explanation whatever from where the £205 bn) will be raised to pay for the promised renewal of the Trident nuclear WMD system, including construction, operation, maintenance, and decommissioning . (neither does the Lib Dem, nor will the Tory manifesto)
It merely asserts:
:"Labour supports the renewal of the Trident nuclear deterrent." ( http://www.labour.org.uk/page/-/Images/manifesto-2017/Labour%20Manifesto%202017.pdf)
Labour's so-called costings document similarly contains zero explanation on the funding of Trident (http://www.labour.org.uk/page/-/Images/manifesto-2017/Funding%20Britain%27s%20Future.PDF)
On civil nuclear the Labour manifesto simply asserts:
“nuclear will continue to be part of the UK energy mix. We will support further nuclear projects.”
Absolutely no mention of the massive subsidies w that will be required. Yet not one journalists has challenged this.
Critics of Labour always demand how spending commitments will be met, but never ask about the massive Trident or nuclear power costs, which dwarf all the other financial spending pledges added together.
Can Labour's leadership now therefore say which investment in hospitals, social care, schools, transport, skills development, home insulation and border guard programmes will be dropped or curtailed to pay for this mad, murderous missile system?
Does Labour have a secret magic money tree to pay for these ludicrous and unwanted nuclear programmes?