Theresa May is right to take school meals off primary school pupils – it's their fault we're in this financial situation anyway

As the Prime Minister points out, if Labour takes money from someone else and spends it on you, that must make you worse off

This is the sort of measure that, says the Prime Minister, will wipe out our deficit by 2025, only ten years after they promised to wipe it out last time (PA)

That’s a proper manifesto, unlike the vague nonsense you get from Labour. Because Theresa May spelt out in detail what the Conservatives stand for, that “We can and must take Britain forwards together”.

I was so overwhelmed I missed the next bit, but I expect it went: “There are those who say we should go diagonally, and others who insist we should go in a curve and then sideways, then up for a bit and along the A303, but unlike Mr Corbyn I for one wouldn’t hesitate to sanction first strike nuclear missiles against these people.”

By contrast, as Conservatives have pointed out, Labour’s manifesto is a pledge to make us all worse off by taking more of our money. This is why every Tory is telling as many people as they can: “They’re going to take your money in tax.”

And this is true as Labour are increasing tax rates for the top five per cent of earners, and these days almost everybody is in the top five per cent.

Labour’s proposed increase starts at income earned above £80,000 a year, so some people might say, “I don’t earn anywhere near that, so it won’t apply to me.” But the simple answer to that is, “Yes you do. Don’t be conned by Labour’s communist lies, you earn £600,000 a year as a commodities broker.”

And that’s how they’re going to make all our grandparents go on the game.

Labour could propose a tax on private zoos, and the Conservatives would say “The people this will hurt most is the ordinary working-class pensioner private zoo-owner, who has a little nest egg from coins saved in a jar, that added up to thirty-five million quid so they bought some pandas and a herd of rhinos for their retirement. And now that little pleasure will be robbed from them by the grasping hands of Labour.”

The Labour Party’s argument is the money from the wealthiest section of society, will then be used to help the majority, by funding education and the NHS. So Conservatives have to point out that if someone takes money from someone else and spends it on you, that makes you worse off.

This is why, whenever anyone wins the lottery, they go straight down the newsagents where they bought the ticket and shout, “I’m not claiming these winnings, you thief. I’m throwing this winning ticket away, I’m not falling for that old trick.”

The Labour tax rates would be so outlandishly communist, they would still be lower than they were in the 1950s under Winston Churchill. So Churchill must have been a communist as well, and when you think about it, can anyone name one occasion when he was prepared to order military action? Never, and I bet he never sang the National Anthem.

The Conservatives sometimes argue that even if you don’t earn enough to be in the higher tax bracket, you’re still affected by Labour’s proposals as you might aspire to be in that higher bracket.

Similarly the Tories can announce: “YOU will be crippled by Labour’s plans to end rail privatisation, because although you’re a rail passenger, you have the aspiration to become the CEO of a major rail franchise that robs the country of millions of pounds a day. So the last thing you want is an efficient transport system to wreck your hopes and dreams.”

The Tories should employ this approach, insisting everyone will be penalised by Labour policies, in other areas as well. So with law and order, they could say: “Labour are promising to put YOU in jail for TWENTY years.”

Labour could explain this is only true if you’ve committed a murder, but you might aspire to be a murderer even if you’re not one now, so it still applies.

They could claim Corbyn is planning to snub you personally, by not attending your state visit. Even though this is a policy specifically aimed at Donald Trump, we should all get angry about it, because any of us might end up as a deranged sociopathic American president, and then we’d be treated just as badly.

The Tories, however, are promising not to take any money from us. This means they’ll be free to pursue policies such as scrapping school meals at infant schools. They claim this will be a boost to schools, because the money saved will be put back into education.

This sort of thinking could make the maligned trade of burglary popular. The thieves could swipe your belongings, but make a pledge they’ll use the money they make to buy you a watch that’s a cheap version of the one they took last time they burgled you.

In any case, why should the small number of children at infant school get taxpayers’ money for frivolities such as food, when it was them that caused the banking crash in the first place, with their reckless lending and borrowing five years before they were born?

And this is the sort of measure that, says the Prime Minister, will wipe out our deficit by 2025, only ten years after they promised to wipe it out last time.

They’ve had lessons off these cults who predict the end of their world, then shuffle it back a few years when the date passes, bringing some harmless fun to the world of debt reduction.

It’s this sort of common sense, that enables the Conservatives to propose cutting the pensioners’ winter fuel allowance, but unlike Labour’s tax plans, this only affects the minority of people who are old or have relations who are old or might one day be old or care in any way about the old and we can’t in any way divert the country’s hard-earned resources to tiny cliques like that.