Explain the first one mysty and for the second, that will only happen if the pub passes on the tax cut.

I don't have an issue with raising the LTA but abolishing it completely only helps the very wealthy and is going to reduce the tax coffers by at least £1 billion a year, Labour have already said they'd reverse this so it will only be about for two years at most. 

That sounds easy* but is I suspect rather difficult to do in terms of drafting unambiguous law (and quickly).

*  And I would also prefer that as a solution to the problem.

If you have  £1m in your pension pot, any other savings you make will be being taxed at the highest rate (an assumption that if your pot is that big you  will be on the highest tax rate.)
The change means you can put as much into savings for your pension as you want and every penny put in will be discounted from your tax liability.  

To gain tax relief, the pot has to be in an approved scheme. There are thousands out there and some of them may, for all I know, have assets in the Cayman Islands or similar.
Most people's pots are with their employer or former employer. After the Maxwell scandal the rules covering these were tightened up enormously. These funds - and the private ones as well - will usually invest the money in a wide range of investments, some high yield (but with a level of risk), some lower yield and relatively safe and some copper bottom safe but lowest rates (government bonds for example). So all of the eggs are no longer in the one basket - which is what Maxwell effectively did with his newspaper pensions.
ISAs are I believe the popular alternative to a company pension pot especially for the self employed but these were introduced after I left the UK so I have no detailed knowledge.
The advantage of putting all of your pension pots under one scheme is that if you have moved around a lot with your employment, you may have small amounts earning very little individually in a range of possibly small pension schemes that earn very little because the fees for managing the scheme take away much of the profit. It costs as much to manage a scheme with say 100k in it as it does a scheme with 50m.. So if the management fees are say 2.5k per year and the gross profit is 5%, then the 100k scheme earns 5k gross but after fees, only gets 2.5k put back into the pot. The 50m scheme earns 2.5m amd the 2.5k fees hardly touch the sides.
Is there a risk in doing this? yes. So choose a reliable company and not Robin and floggit ltd.

Interesting aside that has just come out, Keir Starmer was very vocal in saying the change to the LTA is wrong yet when he stood down as DPP (Director of Public Prosecutions) he was granted a special 'tax unregistered' pension scheme which means he is exempt from paying tax on pension savings over £1 million. Hypocritical?