Mr. G, I partly agree, but you only have to beat your opponent. Nobody begrudges the Romans their victory in the Jugurthine War, despite the Numidians being utterly bloody useless (a shame for Jugurtha, who was rather competent).
@PeterMannionMP: View from The Guardian: They pull out all the stops to get #HSBC exclusive to Ed Miliband for #PMQs and he pisses it everywhere but the bowl
"Cameron says this is desperate stuff. Miliband cannot go in front of business, because he has offended them. He cannot go to Scotland, because he is toxic. He has even offended nuns."
The HSBC stuff is mood music, not a PMQs topic. A brighter LoTO would leave it humming in the background while asking questions on stuff that actually matters to voters. Especially this close to the election. That Ed can't see that is frustrating. He's asking for a kicking and just cannot afford to sustain to many more.
Ben - and any other Labour supporter - if EdM was knocked over by a (pink) bus tomorrow, who would be your preferred replacement? Who could best boost the party's performance and secure a Labour or Labour-led government?
Nicola Sturgeon. She would be brilliant leading the Labour Party.
I would vote for her if she was standing in England.
And if there is a Lab/SNP coalition, who knows how her role will develop? Next CoE?
Hi Barnesian - noted the other day you said you were rejoining the LDs to vote in the leadership election - do you think there are many doing this? Presumably there's a real 'risk' that the hollowed-out membership is much more right-wing than the 2010 membership.
And who are you intending to vote for?
I'll be voting for Tim Farron.
I agree the membership has been hollowed out and probably is more right wing. On the other hand I am surprised by many of my LibDem friends who have stayed with the party to fight back against the neo-liberals who temporally have taken control. I was also impressed by Antifrank's analysis of the composition of the likely surviving LibDem MPs who will be decidedly more left wing. Post May should be very interesting in all sorts of ways!
To my mind Farron looks an absolutely belting bet at odds-against. It's reminiscent of the inflated prices on Gordon Brown - sometimes "inevitabilities" actually are inevitable...
I think Ben M is being a little generous in describing the HSBC fiasco as mood music though. The original leak was in 2007 but it seems that HMRC really got concrete information in 2010. In 2011 they did the deal with Osborne which seems to have allowed a bunch of crooks to avoid prosecution. There were allegedly 7000 UK taxpayers on the list and 1 has been prosecuted. .
A deal with Osborne? The Chancellor doesn't get involved in tax collection.
Disappointing reading this to see how few people understand the way government works. The HMRC is not controlled by the govt in making its decisions about prosecutions, nor should it be.
@Charles Watt about drug dealers being able to do the same thing? It would save a fortune if it was used universally. The simple fact is that the rich and powerful do not see tax avoidance as a crime, merely an accidental overstepping of evasion.
Does anyone know what Cameron is talking about wrt wifi on trains? In my experience pretty much every train already has wifi, it's just that you pay extra for access (although included in first class ticket). So what is new?
It's free on Chiltern! (shame about the landslip, though)
Do we know who the people purchasing at the Tory auction were? So far all I've seen are the prizes and the amounts paid. Do they not need to be named for reasons of transparency?
Of course, in the normal Electoral Commission submissions. Do you have a problem with this?
No, so long as the individuals are named. I'd say the same for any party.
Yes, so any donations over £7,500 will be in the the next quarterly return.
I believe that, in the case of an auction, the rules are that whoever donates the prize is seemed to have made a donation equivalent to the open market value of the prize, and whoever pays for it in the auction is deemed to have made a donation equivalent to the difference between the price paid and the open market value of the prize.
Not sure how they assess the market value of a supper with Michael Gove, though!
Surely that is the point: how many people been prosecuted for benefit fraud in that same period? Why is there one law for the rich and one for the rest of us?
Because the HMRC's mandate is to maximise tax revenues.
So if someone will settle on the basis of full disgorgement of tax due, plus interest, plus penalties they will typically accept that. Tax evasion prosecutions are often difficult due to limited paperwork/proof beyond reasonable doubt, expensive and complex.
In addition, they want to maintain the incentive for people to come forward and admit to previous wrongdoing - if you prosecute a bunch of people that becomes harder.
Don't buy that Charles. Even a dozen rich people serving time for tax evasion would have a far greater impact on future recovery than any level of penalties. At the moment it is the only circumstance I can think of where you can steal and the penalty if you get caught is that you have to give it back.
Very interesting line in PMQ's. At the end of the exchanges with ED Dave said something like and that's why they are losing (can't recall exact words). Whatever the polls say the Tories clearly think they are moving ahead.
Do we know who the people purchasing at the Tory auction were? So far all I've seen are the prizes and the amounts paid. Do they not need to be named for reasons of transparency?
Of course, in the normal Electoral Commission submissions. Do you have a problem with this?
No, so long as the individuals are named. I'd say the same for any party.
Yes, so any donations over £7,500 will be in the the next quarterly return.
I believe that, in the case of an auction, the rules are that whoever donates the prize is seemed to have made a donation equivalent to the open market value of the prize, and whoever pays for it in the auction is deemed to have made a donation equivalent to the difference between the price paid and the open market value of the prize.
Not sure how they assess the market value of a supper with Michael Gove, though!
Very interesting line in PMQ's. At the end of the exchanges with ED Dave said something like and that's why they are losing (can't recall exact words). Whatever the polls say the Tories clearly think they are moving ahead.
Don't buy that Charles. Even a dozen rich people serving time for tax evasion would have a far greater impact on future recovery than any level of penalties. At the moment it is the only circumstance I can think of where you can steal and the penalty if you get caught is that you have to give it back.
Lots of rich people get jailed for tax evasion. Just Google 'HMRC jailed tax evasion' for a sample.
Very interesting line in PMQ's. At the end of the exchanges with ED Dave said something like and that's why they are losing (can't recall exact words). Whatever the polls say the Tories clearly think they are moving ahead.
I buy all the clothes for my granddaughter who is just 8. Up the age of 7 she requested pink or white or pastel colours. When she became seven, a sudden switch to no pink and preference for purple and other stronger colours. At the same age groups, she went from skirts to trousers and shorts.
Now age 8, she has become quite independent in her thinking and having given her a large tablet, she does her homework with me, which includes foreign languages and science and chess. So not quite sure where nurture replaces nature.
Good afternoon Mr. Financier,
Some time ago when I was ranting about how much I want grammar schools brought back, I am sure you said your daughter went to Beaconsfield High Grammar School, the same as my two youngest girls.
Well I am pleased to say that my granddaughter has just been accepted into the same school.
Well done to her, and I am sure that she will do well as long as the next Education secretary does not meddle with Bucks CC.
Through my granddaughter I am getting a view of Spanish (Catalan) education and they certainly work them harder and with a longer school day. So our homework and other activities could not be done without the internet. At 8 she is now quite fluent in 4 languages and is keen to learn more - a great advantage over many UK children. But best of all they keep stretching each child and do not allow them to cruise.
Does anyone know what Cameron is talking about wrt wifi on trains? In my experience pretty much every train already has wifi, it's just that you pay extra for access (although included in first class ticket). So what is new?
It's free on Chiltern! (shame about the landslip, though)
I think Ben M is being a little generous in describing the HSBC fiasco as mood music though. The original leak was in 2007 but it seems that HMRC really got concrete information in 2010. In 2011 they did the deal with Osborne which seems to have allowed a bunch of crooks to avoid prosecution. There were allegedly 7000 UK taxpayers on the list and 1 has been prosecuted. .
A deal with Osborne? The Chancellor doesn't get involved in tax collection.
Disappointing reading this to see how few people understand the way government works. The HMRC is not controlled by the govt in making its decisions about prosecutions, nor should it be.
Not just "people" but "MPs" - we hear often enough questions about why May has not "done something" about Rotherham - do people really think politicians should intervene in criminal investigations? Let alone tax investigations?
Crosby has also been running private polls in marginal seats since the start of the year that apparently suggest the Conservatives will do better than previous surveys have suggested.
Indeed, many MPs in those seats are finding a better reception on the doorstep than they’d expected and some who were looking for jobs outside parliament now think they have a chance of holding on after all.
Very interesting line in PMQ's. At the end of the exchanges with ED Dave said something like and that's why they are losing (can't recall exact words). Whatever the polls say the Tories clearly think they are moving ahead.
Crosby has also been running private polls in marginal seats since the start of the year that apparently suggest the Conservatives will do better than previous surveys have suggested.
Indeed, many MPs in those seats are finding a better reception on the doorstep than they’d expected and some who were looking for jobs outside parliament now think they have a chance of holding on after all.
Crosby has also been running private polls in marginal seats since the start of the year that apparently suggest the Conservatives will do better than previous surveys have suggested.
Indeed, many MPs in those seats are finding a better reception on the doorstep than they’d expected and some who were looking for jobs outside parliament now think they have a chance of holding on after all.
@Charles Watt about drug dealers being able to do the same thing? It would save a fortune if it was used universally. The simple fact is that the rich and powerful do not see tax avoidance as a crime, merely an accidental overstepping of evasion.
The simple fact is that virtually most people do not see tax avoidance as a crime - cash payments to builders, ciggies off the back of a lorry, inheritance tax avoidance scams....it happens at all levels of society an awful lot of the time. There is huge hypocricy on the issue and vast amounts of it regularly spoken by Miliband himself in the H/C. The fact that some very rich people do it as well and get blasted simply highlights the politics of envy and not morality at all.
I think Ben M is being a little generous in describing the HSBC fiasco as mood music though. The original leak was in 2007 but it seems that HMRC really got concrete information in 2010. In 2011 they did the deal with Osborne which seems to have allowed a bunch of crooks to avoid prosecution. There were allegedly 7000 UK taxpayers on the list and 1 has been prosecuted. .
A deal with Osborne? The Chancellor doesn't get involved in tax collection.
Disappointing reading this to see how few people understand the way government works. The HMRC is not controlled by the govt in making its decisions about prosecutions, nor should it be.
Well it's not supposed to be. Now that would be a scandal...........
@CarlottaVance Only one was convicted out of thousands of names, which of course means British tax payers are far more honest than almost any other western democracy.
@SophyRidgeSky: Man to Harman: "You're dividing up men &women...You're making it them v us...Are you thinking of getting blue van" http://t.co/8VVJAUI8jo
Lord Ashcroft tweeted earlier he wants a 2016 EU referendum.. surprised no mentions on here.. if Farage had said it of course he would have got lots of criticism
Very interesting line in PMQ's. At the end of the exchanges with ED Dave said something like and that's why they are losing (can't recall exact words). Whatever the polls say the Tories clearly think they are moving ahead.
Which polls?
The Tory Party private polls.
Was mentioned in the observer the other day.
Is that similar to the Dan Hodges private poll? Is there reason to expect Tory private polling to be more accurate than the public ones?
I buy all the clothes for my granddaughter who is just 8. Up the age of 7 she requested pink or white or pastel colours. When she became seven, a sudden switch to no pink and preference for purple and other stronger colours. At the same age groups, she went from skirts to trousers and shorts.
Now age 8, she has become quite independent in her thinking and having given her a large tablet, she does her homework with me, which includes foreign languages and science and chess. So not quite sure where nurture replaces nature.
Good afternoon Mr. Financier,
Some time ago when I was ranting about how much I want grammar schools brought back, I am sure you said your daughter went to Beaconsfield High Grammar School, the same as my two youngest girls.
Well I am pleased to say that my granddaughter has just been accepted into the same school.
Well done to her, and I am sure that she will do well as long as the next Education secretary does not meddle with Bucks CC.
Through my granddaughter I am getting a view of Spanish (Catalan) education and they certainly work them harder and with a longer school day. So our homework and other activities could not be done without the internet. At 8 she is now quite fluent in 4 languages and is keen to learn more - a great advantage over many UK children. But best of all they keep stretching each child and do not allow them to cruise.
Will be a massive help if she ended up one of the 50% of youth unemployed in Spain then
@Charles Watt about drug dealers being able to do the same thing? It would save a fortune if it was used universally. The simple fact is that the rich and powerful do not see tax avoidance as a crime, merely an accidental overstepping of evasion.
The simple fact is that virtually most people do not see tax avoidance as a crime - cash payments to builders, ciggies off the back of a lorry, inheritance tax avoidance scams....it happens at all levels of society an awful lot of the time. There is huge hypocricy on the issue and vast amounts of it regularly spoken by Miliband himself in the H/C. The fact that some very rich people do it as well and get blasted simply highlights the politics of envy and not morality at all.
Yes - how many of those who deprecate tax avoidance don't buy Duty Free at the airport?
I expect they say No! no! We should pay twice as much on the High Street to make our contribution to the general good.....not.....
@Charles Watt about drug dealers being able to do the same thing? It would save a fortune if it was used universally. The simple fact is that the rich and powerful do not see tax avoidance as a crime, merely an accidental overstepping of evasion.
The simple fact is that virtually most people do not see tax avoidance as a crime - cash payments to builders, ciggies off the back of a lorry, inheritance tax avoidance scams....it happens at all levels of society an awful lot of the time. There is huge hypocricy on the issue and vast amounts of it regularly spoken by Miliband himself in the H/C. The fact that some very rich people do it as well and get blasted simply highlights the politics of envy and not morality at all.
I think Ben M is being a little generous in describing the HSBC fiasco as mood music though. The original leak was in 2007 but it seems that HMRC really got concrete information in 2010. In 2011 they did the deal with Osborne which seems to have allowed a bunch of crooks to avoid prosecution. There were allegedly 7000 UK taxpayers on the list and 1 has been prosecuted. .
A deal with Osborne? The Chancellor doesn't get involved in tax collection.
Disappointing reading this to see how few people understand the way government works. The HMRC is not controlled by the govt in making its decisions about prosecutions, nor should it be.
Not just "people" but "MPs" - we hear often enough questions about why May has not "done something" about Rotherham - do people really think politicians should intervene in criminal investigations? Let alone tax investigations?
Three quibbles.
They have a role of delivering a general kick up their collective arse if they feel there has been insufficient activity and zeal.
It is also the roll of ministers to make guidance on policy, which in this circumstance would be to make general guidelines on where limited resources should be spent, which logically might include a "we think you should devote the bulk of your efforts in this general areas rather than that general area"
Ministers control the department budgets, and logically therefore the number of lawyers, investigators etc. that the department can employ. This isn't to say they can dictate which particular cases should be pursued or with what resources, but its enables them to indicate which sort of cases they want pursued.
Very interesting line in PMQ's. At the end of the exchanges with ED Dave said something like and that's why they are losing (can't recall exact words). Whatever the polls say the Tories clearly think they are moving ahead.
@Charles Watt about drug dealers being able to do the same thing? It would save a fortune if it was used universally. The simple fact is that the rich and powerful do not see tax avoidance as a crime, merely an accidental overstepping of evasion.
The simple fact is that virtually most people do not see tax avoidance as a crime - cash payments to builders, ciggies off the back of a lorry, inheritance tax avoidance scams....it happens at all levels of society an awful lot of the time. There is huge hypocricy on the issue and vast amounts of it regularly spoken by Miliband himself in the H/C. The fact that some very rich people do it as well and get blasted simply highlights the politics of envy and not morality at all.
@Charles Watt about drug dealers being able to do the same thing? It would save a fortune if it was used universally. The simple fact is that the rich and powerful do not see tax avoidance as a crime, merely an accidental overstepping of evasion.
The simple fact is that virtually most people do not see tax avoidance as a crime - cash payments to builders, ciggies off the back of a lorry, inheritance tax avoidance scams....it happens at all levels of society an awful lot of the time. There is huge hypocricy on the issue and vast amounts of it regularly spoken by Miliband himself in the H/C. The fact that some very rich people do it as well and get blasted simply highlights the politics of envy and not morality at all.
Very interesting line in PMQ's. At the end of the exchanges with ED Dave said something like and that's why they are losing (can't recall exact words). Whatever the polls say the Tories clearly think they are moving ahead.
Which polls?
The Tory Party private polls.
Was mentioned in the observer the other day.
Is that similar to the Dan Hodges private poll? Is there reason to expect Tory private polling to be more accurate than the public ones?
Apparently UKIP polling show them ahead in Rochford and Southend East...10/1 freely available
What will be? If you mean child abuse cover ups, I have never said they were lefty conspiracies.. Rotherham definitely was/Dolphin Sq doesn't seem to be/Harris/Saville etc weren't
Very interesting line in PMQ's. At the end of the exchanges with ED Dave said something like and that's why they are losing (can't recall exact words). Whatever the polls say the Tories clearly think they are moving ahead.
Which polls?
The Tory Party private polls.
Was mentioned in the observer the other day.
Is that similar to the Dan Hodges private poll? Is there reason to expect Tory private polling to be more accurate than the public ones?
Apparently UKIP polling show them ahead in Rochford and Southend East...10/1 freely available
That polling makes sense when you think about it - I've taken a small punt at 12s anyway.
The HSBC stuff is mood music, not a PMQs topic. A brighter LoTO would leave it humming in the background while asking questions on stuff that actually matters to voters. Especially this close to the election. That Ed can't see that is frustrating.
Yes, that is right. Quite apart from anything else, it was completely obvious to everyone, except apparently Ed Miliband, that Cameron would be very well-prepared for any question on tax avoidance.
"MaxPB said:
It would be suicidal of Ed to go on tax avoidance. The government's record on reducing tax avoidance has been 100x better than the previous one's. Dave will have too many statistics and new rules ready for it."
Me, yesterday. Ed/Labour are clueless. Also, I notice that the HSBC stuff is off the front page on all but the Guardian as well. Only they and the BBC are ploughing ahead with it.
@Charles Watt about drug dealers being able to do the same thing? It would save a fortune if it was used universally. The simple fact is that the rich and powerful do not see tax avoidance as a crime, merely an accidental overstepping of evasion.
The simple fact is that virtually most people do not see tax avoidance as a crime - cash payments to builders, ciggies off the back of a lorry, inheritance tax avoidance scams....it happens at all levels of society an awful lot of the time. There is huge hypocricy on the issue and vast amounts of it regularly spoken by Miliband himself in the H/C. The fact that some very rich people do it as well and get blasted simply highlights the politics of envy and not morality at all.
Yes - how many of those who deprecate tax avoidance don't buy Duty Free at the airport?
I expect they say No! no! We should pay twice as much on the High Street to make our contribution to the general good.....not.....
@Charles Watt about drug dealers being able to do the same thing? It would save a fortune if it was used universally. The simple fact is that the rich and powerful do not see tax avoidance as a crime, merely an accidental overstepping of evasion.
The simple fact is that virtually most people do not see tax avoidance as a crime - cash payments to builders, ciggies off the back of a lorry, inheritance tax avoidance scams....it happens at all levels of society an awful lot of the time. There is huge hypocricy on the issue and vast amounts of it regularly spoken by Miliband himself in the H/C. The fact that some very rich people do it as well and get blasted simply highlights the politics of envy and not morality at all.
JOHN CHANIN "A slightly more reflective comment on Southend, which is now in an almighty hung state, and it is unclear who will (or indeed can) run the council. The Southend Independents had a pact with UKIP which meant they didn’t compete against each other. Together they hold 18 seats to the Conservatives 19, with 9 Labour and 5 Lib Dems. In this parliamentary seat, UKIP won 2 wards (plus Great Wakering in the Rochford part of the seat), the Independents 4, and Labour 2 (plus Rochford ward). I reckon the Conservatives are in nearly as much trouble here now as in Castle Point. In Southend West, UKIP picked up 3 seats from the Lib Dems……and Labour won its first seat this millennium."
@Charles Watt about drug dealers being able to do the same thing? It would save a fortune if it was used universally. The simple fact is that the rich and powerful do not see tax avoidance as a crime, merely an accidental overstepping of evasion.
The simple fact is that virtually most people do not see tax avoidance as a crime - cash payments to builders, ciggies off the back of a lorry, inheritance tax avoidance scams....it happens at all levels of society an awful lot of the time. There is huge hypocricy on the issue and vast amounts of it regularly spoken by Miliband himself in the H/C. The fact that some very rich people do it as well and get blasted simply highlights the politics of envy and not morality at all.
The HSBC stuff is mood music, not a PMQs topic. A brighter LoTO would leave it humming in the background while asking questions on stuff that actually matters to voters. Especially this close to the election. That Ed can't see that is frustrating.
Yes, that is right. Quite apart from anything else, it was completely obvious to everyone, except apparently Ed Miliband, that Cameron would be very well-prepared for any question on tax avoidance.
"MaxPB said:
It would be suicidal of Ed to go on tax avoidance. The government's record on reducing tax avoidance has been 100x better than the previous one's. Dave will have too many statistics and new rules ready for it."
Me, yesterday. Ed/Labour are clueless. Also, I notice that the HSBC stuff is off the front page on all but the Guardian as well. Only they and the BBC are ploughing ahead with it.
Guardian is irrelevant, BBC isn't...and they are going to keep plugging away at it. Now, of course nobody involved with those two media organisations bend over backwards to ensure tax efficiency on monies earned.
As for dodgy donors, never happened under Labour? Still waiting for that Panorama investigation into them, like they tried (and failed) to get Ashcroft after years and years of trying to paint him as some evil villain.
@isam I know that you are left leaning on some things. What I was pointing out in general is the same thing I have been banging on about for months. If we focus to narrowly, on one party, or culture, we fail the other victims. By all means investigate taxi companies and fast food delivery places as being a point of opportunity for paedophiles but it should not be confined to those alone, and it is not confined to specific areas.
@Charles Watt about drug dealers being able to do the same thing? It would save a fortune if it was used universally. The simple fact is that the rich and powerful do not see tax avoidance as a crime, merely an accidental overstepping of evasion.
Tax avoidance isn't a crime: it's using the maximum flexibility available in law. Personally I think it is unethical and short-sighted, but it is more definitely not a crime. Tax evasion is, however, illegal.
That said, this was interesting. In 2012/13 695 people were criminally prosecuted. In 2013/14 this rose to 795. In 2014/15 HMRC is targeting 1,165 prosecutions.
By comparison "In the past, HMRC would seldom bring criminal prosecutions for tax evasion because of the high costs of legal action compared with the sums likely to be recovered."
I'm waiting for Labour's OAP battle bus which will drive around v-e-r-y slowly in second gear with a megaphone asking: "Do you know who the Prime Minister is?"
Surely that is the point: how many people been prosecuted for benefit fraud in that same period? Why is there one law for the rich and one for the rest of us?
Because the HMRC's mandate is to maximise tax revenues.
So if someone will settle on the basis of full disgorgement of tax due, plus interest, plus penalties they will typically accept that. Tax evasion prosecutions are often difficult due to limited paperwork/proof beyond reasonable doubt, expensive and complex.
In addition, they want to maintain the incentive for people to come forward and admit to previous wrongdoing - if you prosecute a bunch of people that becomes harder.
Don't buy that Charles. Even a dozen rich people serving time for tax evasion would have a far greater impact on future recovery than any level of penalties. At the moment it is the only circumstance I can think of where you can steal and the penalty if you get caught is that you have to give it back.
So how is Ed going to over-reach himself and mess up this Guardian/BBC/Labour Party stitch up over tax avoidance?
We all know that at some point he will mess it up and the sh*t will be thrown back at him... How do we think it will happen?
It has already started, it all happened under Labour when Ed was working at the Treasury.
Phone hacking anybody....BBC had terrible memory for forgetting who used to be Rupert best mates...I am sure it will be no different with this...in fact they did already, totally forget to mention in the Panorama program (and one would think it was quite relevant) that a bloke who was a major Labour donor was one of their examples of a major tax dodger.
@Charles Watt about drug dealers being able to do the same thing? It would save a fortune if it was used universally. The simple fact is that the rich and powerful do not see tax avoidance as a crime, merely an accidental overstepping of evasion.
The simple fact is that virtually most people do not see tax avoidance as a crime - cash payments to builders, ciggies off the back of a lorry, inheritance tax avoidance scams....it happens at all levels of society an awful lot of the time. There is huge hypocricy on the issue and vast amounts of it regularly spoken by Miliband himself in the H/C. The fact that some very rich people do it as well and get blasted simply highlights the politics of envy and not morality at all.
@isam I know that you are left leaning on some things. What I was pointing out in general is the same thing I have been banging on about for months. If we focus to narrowly, on one party, or culture, we fail the other victims. By all means investigate taxi companies and fast food delivery places as being a point of opportunity for paedophiles but it should not be confined to those alone, and it is not confined to specific areas.
I have never really bought the idea that Pakistani muslims from Yorkshire are more inclined to raping schoolgirls than other people due to their skin colour or religion. Despicable as it is their crimes aren't different to any other ring of child abusers.
The scandal is that people were so scared of appearing racist that they didn't want to investigate it, and for that I would 100% blame leftie politics. It is that kind of mindset that made me stop voting Labour after 2010
Just listened to PMQs - Dire from Cameron "We're at the same level as the Gordon Brown Gov't on tax and so forth" isn't a vote winner.
Narrow win for Ed.
Heard it too but disagree with your verdict. Cameron came across as competent with details of actual actions on message. Miliband was all ranty school boy who's only lines were insult and innuendo.
As ever with these "party funding"/"sleaze" type stories, nobody "won" but politics lost.
People will just say "they are all as bad as each other" and shrug their shoulders.
Of course the public are partly complicit in all of this as well, as they accept "dodgy donor's" and "union sponsored candidates" as a price worth paying to avoid having to pay for political parties out of taxation....
Not sure, however the Guardian's 'Cayman Islands offshore corporation' which was set up in 2009 to off set Stamp Duty and minimise their Tax exposure, was still running as of June 2013.
"HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) was given the leaked data in 2010 and has identified 1,100 people from the list of 7,000 British clients who had not paid their taxes. But almost five years later, only one tax evader has been prosecuted."
Just listened to PMQs - Dire from Cameron "We're at the same level as the Gordon Brown Gov't on tax and so forth" isn't a vote winner.
Narrow win for Ed.
Heard it too but disagree with your verdict. Cameron came across as competent with details of actual actions on message. Miliband was all ranty school boy who's only lines were insult and innuendo.
Just listened to PMQs - Dire from Cameron "We're at the same level as the Gordon Brown Gov't on tax and so forth" isn't a vote winner.
Narrow win for Ed.
Heard it too but disagree with your verdict. Cameron came across as competent with details of actual actions on message. Miliband was all ranty school boy who's only lines were insult and innuendo.
All I heard from him was "Brown Gov't was at it too". Comparing yourself to the worst Gov't in living memory isn't great in my book.
Not sure, however the Guardian's 'Caymans Islands offshore corporation' which was set up in 2009 to off set Stamp Duty and minimise their Tax exposure, was still running as of June 2013.
Mike Smithson said: "'He's a dodgy Prime Minister surrounded by dodgy donors.' Great line from Ed which will be the one picked up by the bulletins."
It was an awful line which was met by groans in the chamber. The dodgy donor bit might have been ok but no-one thinks Cameron is 'dodgy.' He might be lots of things, some of them unrepeatable, but dodgy isn't one. Miliband got too angry and lost the plot. The rebuffs about Labour were powerful.
Trouble is, Mr Smithson, Tony Blair is too fresh in people's minds, especially now, for any of this to stick hard. The most dodgy politician in a generation, probably for five decades, is now back propping up Miliband and fundraising for him. Under Bliar people got rich and avoided tax like never before in British history.
But guess when you're desperate, and losing, you'll try any ol' stick though.
Just listened to PMQs - Dire from Cameron "We're at the same level as the Gordon Brown Gov't on tax and so forth" isn't a vote winner.
Narrow win for Ed.
Heard it too but disagree with your verdict. Cameron came across as competent with details of actual actions on message. Miliband was all ranty school boy who's only lines were insult and innuendo.
"HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) was given the leaked data in 2010 and has identified 1,100 people from the list of 7,000 British clients who had not paid their taxes. But almost five years later, only one tax evader has been prosecuted."
That's obviously looking at one specific case. I've no idea on the details of why, whether, when they intend to prosecute.
But why didn't the Labour government buy the information when it became available in 2007?
Mike Smithson said: "'He's a dodgy Prime Minister surrounded by dodgy donors.' Great line from Ed which will be the one picked up by the bulletins."
It was an awful line which was met by groans in the chamber. The dodgy donor bit might have been ok but no-one thinks Cameron is 'dodgy.' He might be lots of things, some of them unrepeatable, but dodgy isn't one. Miliband got too angry and lost the plot. The rebuffs about Labour were powerful.
Trouble is, Mr Smithson, Tony Blair is too fresh in people's minds, especially now, for any of this to stick hard. The most dodgy politician in a generation, probably for five decades, is now back propping up Miliband and fundraising for him. Under Bliar people got rich and avoided tax like never before in British history.
But guess when you're desperate, and losing, you'll try any ol' stick though.
Mike Smithson said: "'He's a dodgy Prime Minister surrounded by dodgy donors.' Great line from Ed which will be the one picked up by the bulletins."
It was an awful line which was met by groans in the chamber. The dodgy donor bit might have been ok but no-one thinks Cameron is 'dodgy.'
That's what I think too. Cameron's personal rating's have held up remarkably well and what's interesting is that after nearly 10 years as Tory leader the Labour Party still haven't really come up with an attack line against Cameron that has stuck.
It's something they have always struggled with, ever since "Dave The Chameleon"
Of course it's much easier to attack Cameron from the Right and a lot of UKIP's attack's have stuck (partly from the things Dave has said himself like the "closet racists" line) but the left have always struggled to really get an attack line to stick against Cam...
I think the bloke who had it. This is just from memory, but I think he was always demanding a "finder's fee" - the French & the Germans paid up, but the last government refused to.
Now there's always an argument about whether someone should be allowed to profit from a criminal act (the bloke with the data - I believe - stole it), but given that it cost HMRC £1m and I've seen figures of £185m in recovered tax suggested, I'm happy to categorise it as one of those things that government do about which it is best not to inquire too deeply
Comments
Edited extra bit: wrote 'useful' initially. Bah.
Still, Mike thinks its a great line
Roger you are just another pathetic hypocrite, no wonder you are a Socialist?
Watt about drug dealers being able to do the same thing?
It would save a fortune if it was used universally.
The simple fact is that the rich and powerful do not see tax avoidance as a crime, merely an accidental overstepping of evasion.
I believe that, in the case of an auction, the rules are that whoever donates the prize is seemed to have made a donation equivalent to the open market value of the prize, and whoever pays for it in the auction is deemed to have made a donation equivalent to the difference between the price paid and the open market value of the prize.
Not sure how they assess the market value of a supper with Michael Gove, though!
Was mentioned in the observer the other day.
Do you think he's thought this through?
Through my granddaughter I am getting a view of Spanish (Catalan) education and they certainly work them harder and with a longer school day. So our homework and other activities could not be done without the internet. At 8 she is now quite fluent in 4 languages and is keen to learn more - a great advantage over many UK children. But best of all they keep stretching each child and do not allow them to cruise.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-31422869
Note that is 30 cases, not individual victims.
Indeed, many MPs in those seats are finding a better reception on the doorstep than they’d expected and some who were looking for jobs outside parliament now think they have a chance of holding on after all.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/feb/08/labour-needs-good-slogan-needs-it-now
Only good private polling is leaked.
Without the protection of parliamentary privilege are we ok to repeat Ed's comment about Tory donors being "dodgy" ?
Wouldn't want OGH Daveophobia to get him into trouble with Messers Sue Grabbit & Run.....
Only one was convicted out of thousands of names, which of course means British tax payers are far more honest than almost any other western democracy.
@SophyRidgeSky: Man to Harman: "You're dividing up men &women...You're making it them v us...Are you thinking of getting blue van" http://t.co/8VVJAUI8jo
@VickiYoung01: Man intrudes on Harman's chat with women to ask why she's not talking to men. http://t.co/F2t2oRGqyT
I expect they say No! no! We should pay twice as much on the High Street to make our contribution to the general good.....not.....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_evasion
They have a role of delivering a general kick up their collective arse if they feel there has been insufficient activity and zeal.
It is also the roll of ministers to make guidance on policy, which in this circumstance would be to make general guidelines on where limited resources should be spent, which logically might include a "we think you should devote the bulk of your efforts in this general areas rather than that general area"
Ministers control the department budgets, and logically therefore the number of lawyers, investigators etc. that the department can employ. This isn't to say they can dictate which particular cases should be pursued or with what resources, but its enables them to indicate which sort of cases they want pursued.
Mr. Senior, is that the same Miliband who claimed he wasn't going to personalise politics?
Narrow win for Ed.
It will be another "lefty" conspiracy then?
It would be suicidal of Ed to go on tax avoidance. The government's record on reducing tax avoidance has been 100x better than the previous one's. Dave will have too many statistics and new rules ready for it."
Me, yesterday. Ed/Labour are clueless. Also, I notice that the HSBC stuff is off the front page on all but the Guardian as well. Only they and the BBC are ploughing ahead with it.
Usually everything, but in this case the lack of proper scrutiny in Essex over child abuse cases.
User Actions
Following
Old Holborn
@Holbornlolz
10 minutes and it's parked on a zebra crossing. Going well then
I don't blame lefties for everything, I am quite left wing myself on many things, and don't see it as a terrible insult
JOHN CHANIN
"A slightly more reflective comment on Southend, which is now in an almighty hung state, and it is unclear who will (or indeed can) run the council. The Southend Independents had a pact with UKIP which meant they didn’t compete against each other. Together they hold 18 seats to the Conservatives 19, with 9 Labour and 5 Lib Dems.
In this parliamentary seat, UKIP won 2 wards (plus Great Wakering in the Rochford part of the seat), the Independents 4, and Labour 2 (plus Rochford ward). I reckon the Conservatives are in nearly as much trouble here now as in Castle Point.
In Southend West, UKIP picked up 3 seats from the Lib Dems……and Labour won its first seat this millennium."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-31412434
As for dodgy donors, never happened under Labour? Still waiting for that Panorama investigation into them, like they tried (and failed) to get Ashcroft after years and years of trying to paint him as some evil villain.
I know that you are left leaning on some things.
What I was pointing out in general is the same thing I have been banging on about for months.
If we focus to narrowly, on one party, or culture, we fail the other victims.
By all means investigate taxi companies and fast food delivery places as being a point of opportunity for paedophiles but it should not be confined to those alone, and it is not confined to specific areas.
We all know that at some point he will mess it up and the sh*t will be thrown back at him... How do we think it will happen?
The issue with Rotherham is that a section of society was deliberately ignored because of fear of being presumed racist. That is surely racist itself.
If Old Etonians were allowed free rein because to investigate them would be anti-Etonian, you would be the first to complain.
That said, this was interesting. In 2012/13 695 people were criminally prosecuted. In 2013/14 this rose to 795. In 2014/15 HMRC is targeting 1,165 prosecutions.
By comparison "In the past, HMRC would seldom bring criminal prosecutions for tax evasion because of the high costs of legal action compared with the sums likely to be recovered."
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/cb829586-5203-11e4-b55e-00144feab7de.html
In 2010/11 there were 200 convictions* and in 2011/12 550 convictions*
Couldn't find any figures for the last government, but the trend seems pretty clear
* The Beeb says that 9/10 prosecutions result in conviction http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-21121840
" it all happened under Labour when Ed was working at the Treasury"
When did the evidence come to light?
See my post at 1:35 in response to @Smarmeron
I am complaining....about all of them!
The scandal is that people were so scared of appearing racist that they didn't want to investigate it, and for that I would 100% blame leftie politics. It is that kind of mindset that made me stop voting Labour after 2010
But the last government wasn't willing to pay for it. The Coalition bought it in 2010.
Hmmmh.
People will just say "they are all as bad as each other" and shrug their shoulders.
Of course the public are partly complicit in all of this as well, as they accept "dodgy donor's" and "union sponsored candidates" as a price worth paying to avoid having to pay for political parties out of taxation....
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/guardian-media-firm-makes-186m-but-pays-only-200000-tax-8675818.html
"I am complaining....about all of them."
Fair enough, but if you'd looked into the wrong group in Rotherham, you'd have been sent on a re-education course.
So, 2010 then?
"HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) was given the leaked data in 2010 and has identified 1,100 people from the list of 7,000 British clients who had not paid their taxes. But almost five years later, only one tax evader has been prosecuted."
It was an awful line which was met by groans in the chamber. The dodgy donor bit might have been ok but no-one thinks Cameron is 'dodgy.' He might be lots of things, some of them unrepeatable, but dodgy isn't one. Miliband got too angry and lost the plot. The rebuffs about Labour were powerful.
Trouble is, Mr Smithson, Tony Blair is too fresh in people's minds, especially now, for any of this to stick hard. The most dodgy politician in a generation, probably for five decades, is now back propping up Miliband and fundraising for him. Under Bliar people got rich and avoided tax like never before in British history.
But guess when you're desperate, and losing, you'll try any ol' stick though.
But why didn't the Labour government buy the information when it became available in 2007?
Who was selling them at that time?
It's something they have always struggled with, ever since "Dave The Chameleon"
Of course it's much easier to attack Cameron from the Right and a lot of UKIP's attack's have stuck (partly from the things Dave has said himself like the "closet racists" line) but the left have always struggled to really get an attack line to stick against Cam...
Now there's always an argument about whether someone should be allowed to profit from a criminal act (the bloke with the data - I believe - stole it), but given that it cost HMRC £1m and I've seen figures of £185m in recovered tax suggested, I'm happy to categorise it as one of those things that government do about which it is best not to inquire too deeply