Most of the 'politically knowledgable' would agree, I believe, that political party manifestos are in general 'woolly-worded' works of fiction, in that they bear no relevance to what parties actually do once they assume power.
Fraser Nelson has a post on Coffee House detailing the 'goings-on' at Labour's press conference this morning, during which Mandelson told Adam Boulton that he was not standing at this election, to which Boulton replied that neither was Mandelson.
Gary Gibbon also posts on the small matter of transparency and honesty and that according to the Institute of Fiscal Studies, it thinks you are in the dark: you don’t know 87 per cent of the cuts Labour would have to make if they stuck to their election promises, 82 per cent of the Tory cuts that would come your way, 74 per cent of the cuts the Lib Dems would have to make.
This failure on the part of politicians to answer questions, instead resorting to counter-claim and smear, lends more credence to the suggestion I posed yesterday. David Cameron rails against politicians taking the public for mugs - the problem is, Dave, we still are, not least by you!
IanPJ on Politics also has a 'good read' on this election campaign, to date, and which is also relevant to this question of politicians failing to answer or address matters that the electorate wished addressed.
Update: video of the Labour press conference: