In case we forgot, it was this time last year that Labour briefly went into the lead in the polls (after Osborne tried to cut benefits for disabled people in the Budget).
West Oxfordshire Hailey, Minster Lovell & Leafield LDEM gain from CON 9 March 2017 Lib Dem 567 46.7 34.0 Con 504 41.5 3.8 Labour 71 5.8 -4.5 Green 38 3.1 -2.8 UKIP 35 2.9 2.9
In case we forgot, it was this time last year that Labour briefly went into the lead in the polls (after Osborne tried to cut benefits for disabled people in the Budget).
A real sickener. See this is the problem, if you don't hit a (too lightly taxed) relatively well off portion of the population - just who the hell do you "hit" to get the nation's finances in order ? This is why I pray and hope Hammond won't back down.
In case we forgot, it was this time last year that Labour briefly went into the lead in the polls (after Osborne tried to cut benefits for disabled people in the Budget).
A real sickener. See this is the problem, if you don't hit a (too lightly taxed) relatively well off portion of the population - just who the hell do you "hit" to get the nation's finances in order ? This is why I pray and hope Hammond won't back down.
What is nonsense about the outrage is that the "hit" really isn't massive (and I will be hit by this). Brown regularly used to hit my pockets harder with fiscal drag, fuel escalator, etc etc etc.
I see the German authorities / media are doing their usual stuff...Unnamed axe attacker, mental health, from former Yugoslavia...Yugoslavia hadn't existed for 20+ years. How about saying Serbia or Kosovo etc.
This kind of obscurification doesn't help. That Tim Pool guy who went to Sweden had a very balanced summary of the situation he found and put a lot of blame on this kind of approach just fueling things.
Broxbourne Waltham Cross CON gain from Lab 9 March 2017
Conservative 650 41.0 -3.5 Labour 646 40.8 -14.8 UKIP 200 12.6 12.6 Lib Dem 89 5.6 5.6
I'll delurk for this as it's my patch. It was an absolute nail biter at the count. Labour couldn't believe it was so close and in theory they are correct as they were defending a 240 vote majority. It isn't a ward that is naturally Tory and is in many ways trending away.
Turnout was about 10% down on an ordinary poll and as the limited movement in the Conservative vote share suggests I think our campaign hit its targets more effectively and efficiently. Anyway I'm now back to lurking.
Broxbourne Waltham Cross CON gain from Lab 9 March 2017
Conservative 650 41.0 -3.5 Labour 646 40.8 -14.8 UKIP 200 12.6 12.6 Lib Dem 89 5.6 5.6
I'll delurk for this as it's my patch. It was an absolute nail biter at the count. Labour couldn't believe it was so close and in theory they are correct as they were defending a 240 vote majority. It isn't a ward that is naturally Tory and is in many ways trending away.
Turnout was about 10% down on an ordinary poll and as the limited movement in the Conservative vote share suggests I think our campaign hit its targets more effectively and efficiently. Anyway I'm now back to lurking.
before u go why is it trending away from Labour? commuterland?
So.....after the OmNICshambles budget, as widely predicted, the Tories have crashed in the polls and are losing by-elections to not just the Lib Dems, but Labour too. Did I get that right?
So.....after the OmNICshambles budget, as widely predicted, the Tories have crashed in the polls and are losing by-elections to not just the Lib Dems, but Labour too. Did I get that right?
Mark Senior posted once to report a LD gain. Since then - nada! Hahaha....
So.....after the OmNICshambles budget, as widely predicted, the Tories have crashed in the polls and are losing by-elections to not just the Lib Dems, but Labour too. Did I get that right?
Mark Senior posted once to report a LD gain. Since then - nada! Hahaha....
Broxbourne Waltham Cross CON gain from Lab 9 March 2017
Conservative 650 41.0 -3.5 Labour 646 40.8 -14.8 UKIP 200 12.6 12.6 Lib Dem 89 5.6 5.6
I'll delurk for this as it's my patch. It was an absolute nail biter at the count. Labour couldn't believe it was so close and in theory they are correct as they were defending a 240 vote majority. It isn't a ward that is naturally Tory and is in many ways trending away.
Turnout was about 10% down on an ordinary poll and as the limited movement in the Conservative vote share suggests I think our campaign hit its targets more effectively and efficiently. Anyway I'm now back to lurking.
Good to see you posting again ToryTim after a four month absence - am I correct in remembering that around a decade ago you were a truly MEGA poster on this site albeit under a different name?
So.....after the OmNICshambles budget, as widely predicted, the Tories have crashed in the polls and are losing by-elections to not just the Lib Dems, but Labour too. Did I get that right?
Mark Senior posted once to report a LD gain. Since then - nada! Hahaha....
To be fair, preparations for government take up a lot of time
The Times: "Theresa May put the brakes on a controversial tax rise for 1.6 million self-employed workers last night in the face of a Tory rebellion.
The Prime Minister said that legislation to increase national insurance contributions (NICs) will not be put before the Commons until the autumn and left the door open to concessions only a day after the measure was announced in the budget."
TMay has clearly heard the alarm bells sounding concerning these ill-conceived Budget proposals. To delay a vote thereon "until the autumn" probably means they're dead.
In previous times, a lack of support on this scale from a Chancellor's Prime Minister would have resulted in his immediate resignation. Not this time though I fancy ..... but Spreadsheet Phil did misjudge things very badly, even though his intentions were honourable.
This is a BIG story, which Mike really needs to be leading on, once he's had his cornflakes and has otherwise got his act together!
The Daily Telegraph has picked up on it to with this dramaticheadline:
"Theresa May denies breaking election tax promise as 100 Tory MPs prepare to join Budget rebellion"
Mrs May cannot herself be absolved from blame, having effectively signed off on the Chancellor's budget measures. This is easily the biggest crisis of her premiership so far.
Both the PM and her Chancellor very badly misjudged the reaction. The NIC changes were bad enough, but coupled with the draconian increase in tax on dividends announced in both last year's budget and this year's was way too much for Tory MPs to stomach.
"The delay means the row will now rumble on for months, ending any prospect of Mrs May calling a snap election."
Of course we on PB.com knew that she was never in a position as such to call a snap General election anyway, but the story nevertheless serves to undermine her authority.
Unfortunately Labour have allowed the Tories to develop a hubris, buoyed by opinion polls and what they consider to be a strong position on BREXIT, plus a UK implosion and Lib Dem slow but not meteoric recovery, TM and Hammond literally took their eyes off the ball, not sure what the long term future for Hammond is.....he will weather this one but not sure what it means in the longer term and when things get tricky with BREXIT he has lost the confidence of some of his backers. Not quite the poll tax but the 1922 Committee has a long memory
Do you ever get the feeling you're talking to yourself?
Have you bothered to look at the polling instead of quoting the rantings of overpaid self-employed journos?
Well naturally, it was hardly surprising that the majority of people who are subject to P.A.Y.E. were only too happy to see the self-employed lot get it in the neck. That follows as night follows day, but in terms of upsetting Tory voters this was a very grave mistake by Hammond and one I doubt he will recover from. Introducing a few clever lines into a budget speech is one thing, but this was quite another.
Do you ever get the feeling you're talking to yourself?
Have you bothered to look at the polling instead of quoting the rantings of overpaid self-employed journos?
Well naturally, it was hardly surprising that the majority of people who are subject to P.A.Y.E. were only too happy to see the self-employed lot get it in the neck. That follows as night follows day, but in terms of upsetting Tory voters this was a very grave mistake by Hammond and one I doubt he will recover from. Introducing a few clever lines into a budget speech is one thing, but this was quite another.
So your evidence that Tory voters are upset is....zilch! Glad we cleared that up.
Broxbourne Waltham Cross CON gain from Lab 9 March 2017
Conservative 650 41.0 -3.5 Labour 646 40.8 -14.8 UKIP 200 12.6 12.6 Lib Dem 89 5.6 5.6
I'll delurk for this as it's my patch. It was an absolute nail biter at the count. Labour couldn't believe it was so close and in theory they are correct as they were defending a 240 vote majority. It isn't a ward that is naturally Tory and is in many ways trending away.
Turnout was about 10% down on an ordinary poll and as the limited movement in the Conservative vote share suggests I think our campaign hit its targets more effectively and efficiently. Anyway I'm now back to lurking.
before u go why is it trending away from Labour? commuterland?
Sorry, a long day caught up with me. I think a host of reasons for it shifting away. There is an increasing minority population and increasing numbers of voters in lower socioeconomic groups. In many ways Waltham Cross looks south to London rather than North to the rest of Herts. So even though there is some increase in demographics that would ordinarily favour Conservatives they tend to follow more urban voting patterns. Hope this helps.
Broxbourne Waltham Cross CON gain from Lab 9 March 2017
Conservative 650 41.0 -3.5 Labour 646 40.8 -14.8 UKIP 200 12.6 12.6 Lib Dem 89 5.6 5.6
I'll delurk for this as it's my patch. It was an absolute nail biter at the count. Labour couldn't believe it was so close and in theory they are correct as they were defending a 240 vote majority. It isn't a ward that is naturally Tory and is in many ways trending away.
Turnout was about 10% down on an ordinary poll and as the limited movement in the Conservative vote share suggests I think our campaign hit its targets more effectively and efficiently. Anyway I'm now back to lurking.
Good to see you posting again ToryTim after a four month absence - am I correct in remembering that around a decade ago you were a truly MEGA poster on this site albeit under a different name?
I have posted under a different name, don't think I would ever have been classed as a mega poster although far more prolific than my present rate.
Broxbourne Waltham Cross CON gain from Lab 9 March 2017
Conservative 650 41.0 -3.5 Labour 646 40.8 -14.8 UKIP 200 12.6 12.6 Lib Dem 89 5.6 5.6
I'll delurk for this as it's my patch. It was an absolute nail biter at the count. Labour couldn't believe it was so close and in theory they are correct as they were defending a 240 vote majority. It isn't a ward that is naturally Tory and is in many ways trending away.
Turnout was about 10% down on an ordinary poll and as the limited movement in the Conservative vote share suggests I think our campaign hit its targets more effectively and efficiently. Anyway I'm now back to lurking.
Good to see you posting again ToryTim after a four month absence - am I correct in remembering that around a decade ago you were a truly MEGA poster on this site albeit under a different name?
I have posted under a different name, don't think I would ever have been classed as a mega poster although far more prolific than my present rate.
Perhaps I'm getting confused with having seen you more on Iain Dale's then blog, but whatever, it's good to see you back.
Do you ever get the feeling you're talking to yourself?
Have you bothered to look at the polling instead of quoting the rantings of overpaid self-employed journos?
in terms of upsetting Tory voters this was a very grave mistake
So we should expect to see substantially lower support for the measure among Tory voters.....?
Well, given that the PM appears to be rowing back on the policy, one might say we are seeing substantially lower support from her (and the Tory backbenches).
Tactical retreat - just like Thatcher. Come the Autumn it will be slipped back in, once the self-employed commentariat realise they haven't got the PAYE paying public on their side.....
Do you ever get the feeling you're talking to yourself?
Have you bothered to look at the polling instead of quoting the rantings of overpaid self-employed journos?
in terms of upsetting Tory voters this was a very grave mistake
So we should expect to see substantially lower support for the measure among Tory voters.....?
Well, given that the PM appears to be rowing back on the policy, one might say we are seeing substantially lower support from her (and the Tory backbenches).
Like I said upthread, I'll be very surprised if these NIC proposals aren't quietly (if possible) killed off. Postponing a vote thereon until "the autumn" sounds incredibly vague. In any case, isn't it normal for the entire Finance Bill to be enacted before then?
Do you ever get the feeling you're talking to yourself?
Have you bothered to look at the polling instead of quoting the rantings of overpaid self-employed journos?
in terms of upsetting Tory voters this was a very grave mistake
So we should expect to see substantially lower support for the measure among Tory voters.....?
Well, given that the PM appears to be rowing back on the policy, one might say we are seeing substantially lower support from her (and the Tory backbenches).
Only rowing back on the timing, I suspect. It will be reintroduced in the autumn when the extra maternity rights etc for self-employed have been added. Should be enough to let down the tyres on the outrage bus.
Get rid of the utterly useless Jezza and McIRA and replace them with Nandy and Chuka and the game changes, almost overnight.
Labour's problem is deeper than that. In Ed you had a leader who seems like a giant in comparison to Jezza and his team, yet they still lost.
Their problem is that Labour's brand is utterly shot; it was shot in 2015, and events since then have just made the situation worse. To rebuild Labour they need to rebuild the brand, and that's difficult at the best of times.
Every day Corbynites remains in control of the party, the fewer people will want to shift their support back to them.
"The delay means the row will now rumble on for months, ending any prospect of Mrs May calling a snap election."
Of course we on PB.com knew that she was never in a position as such to call a snap General election anyway, but the story nevertheless serves to undermine her authority.
Do you ever get the feeling you're talking to yourself?
Have you bothered to look at the polling instead of quoting the rantings of overpaid self-employed journos?
in terms of upsetting Tory voters this was a very grave mistake
So we should expect to see substantially lower support for the measure among Tory voters.....?
Well, given that the PM appears to be rowing back on the policy, one might say we are seeing substantially lower support from her (and the Tory backbenches).
Only rowing back on the timing, I suspect. It will be reintroduced in the autumn when the extra maternity rights etc for self-employed have been added. Should be enough to let down the tyres on the outrage bus.
May:
"This is a change that leaves lower-paid self-employed workers better off. It's accompanied by more rights and protections for self-employed workers and it reforms the system of National Insurance to make it simpler, to make if fairer and to make it more progressive. What we will do this summer is publish a paper which will explain the full effects of the changes," she said.
That will contain details about the reforms to National Insurance Contributions (NICs) "along with some changes we plan to make on rights and protections for self-employed workers, including on issues like pension rights and parental rights and maternity pay".
It seems the media and the Conservatives themselves are our only effective opposition, which is a really odd position to be in.
It also shows a political weakness in May and Hammond: they failed to sell what was basically a simple and small change, which itself was partially offset by an earlier change, in the absence of a functioning opposition.
"Gentlemen, You are just now to Engage with a parcel of Rable; a Parcel of Brutes, Being a small number of Labourites, You can expect no Booty from such a poor despicable Pack. I have Authority to Declare, That you shall have Eight Full Hour's liberty to Plunder and Pillage the Labour party, (and the Place's which harbour'd and succour'd Them) at your Discretion, with Impunity".
Just watching This Week - I think a lot of normally sensible people like Andrew Neil and Peter from Putney have completely lost the plot over this NIC issue. This won't even register with the vast majority of voters. Whether it's the right thing to do is another matter, of course.
I think a lot of normally sensible people like Andrew Neil and Peter from Putney have completely lost the plot over this NIC issue.
I'm sure that's completely unrelated to their personal circumstances......interestingly, quite a few who have been upfront about this - 'it will affect me' have also been relatively sanguine - 'I'll lose a bit but its not a big deal'.....
"This is totally reversed from 2014 I am confident that a lot of EU nationals who voted No last time will now be fervent YES votes"
This seems like the most obvious demographic whose vote will flip en masse to Yes.
All six of them.
115,000 or thereabouts. It will lower the bar to clear for a Yes vote.
Scotland can take Pret A Manger.
Lots of 'skilled' EU migrants that can put a kettle on and sell a sandwich.
Seems they cannot find anyone in England with said skills, paints a pretty picture. I presume you are on eof the layabouts that cannot make a cup of coffee.
Stop me if you've heard this before....Scotland already has a power, but doesn't use it - and the SNP demands they want complete control over something they don't use.
Nicola Sturgeon has been challenged by the Home Office to provide evidence that Scotland needs its own immigration policy after it emerged there is flexibility in the current system that has barely been used. Robert Goodwill, the Immigration Minister, said there is a Scotland-only Shortage Occupation List (SOL) for employers wanting to bring in the skilled personnel they need from outside the European Economic Area. But he said it is “largely aligned” with the UK’s list despite “extensive” consultation with Scottish employers about the sort of posts they need people from other countries to fill. Mr Goodwill challenged the Nationalists to provide evidence that Scotland’s needs are so different that it would justify devolving control over immigration. He concluded the “inconvenient” truth for the SNP is that they were almost identical to the rest of the UK’s needs.
The UK Government said the Scotland-only list included just two categories of professions – physical scientists and medical professions – covering a total of five specific jobs. His intervention, in a Westminster Hall debate in the Commons, undermined Nicola Sturgeon’s hugely complicated plan for a special Brexit deal so that Scotland could stay in the EU single market when the rest of the UK comes out.
Just watching This Week - I think a lot of normally sensible people like Andrew Neil and Peter from Putney have completely lost the plot over this NIC issue. This won't even register with the vast majority of voters. Whether it's the right thing to do is another matter, of course.
85% of voters unaffected. 10% of voters better off.
5% of voters are worse off - who knew there were so many journalists?
@MattSingh_: So in one hour I've already had "Chicken coup", "YouGov are Tories" and "That's not what my Twitter says". Full house!
@AdrianSpalinky: @britainelects Woohooo, lying cheating tories provide poll stats that show lying cheating tories ahead in polls @YouGov The right wing fascists friends
@MattSingh_: So in one hour I've already had "Chicken coup", "YouGov are Tories" and "That's not what my Twitter says". Full house!
@AdrianSpalinky: @britainelects Woohooo, lying cheating tories provide poll stats that show lying cheating tories ahead in polls @YouGov The right wing fascists friends
CON 391 LAB 172 LD 8 (titters) UKIP 0 GRN 1 SNP 56
Majority of 132.
Just a bit of fun, of course..
I suspect it would be worse for SNP (slightly) and Lab (a good deal), and better for Con and LD.
LDs are making a recovery where it matters, while Con is making inroads into exactly the demographics that would deliver northern and midlands seats by the bucketload. Con would also stand a decent chance of gaining half a dozen or so seats in Scotland.
Always one brings out the Tory surge KLAXON , I also could be the next Pope.
CON 391 LAB 172 LD 8 (titters) UKIP 0 GRN 1 SNP 56
Majority of 132.
Just a bit of fun, of course..
I suspect it would be worse for SNP (slightly) and Lab (a good deal), and better for Con and LD.
LDs are making a recovery where it matters, while Con is making inroads into exactly the demographics that would deliver northern and midlands seats by the bucketload. Con would also stand a decent chance of gaining half a dozen or so seats in Scotland.
Always one brings out the Tory surge KLAXON , I also could be the next Pope.
Isn't that how the new pope is announced, with a blast from the STS Klaxon?
In case we forgot, it was this time last year that Labour briefly went into the lead in the polls (after Osborne tried to cut benefits for disabled people in the Budget).
A real sickener. See this is the problem, if you don't hit a (too lightly taxed) relatively well off portion of the population - just who the hell do you "hit" to get the nation's finances in order ? This is why I pray and hope Hammond won't back down.
Maybe if the Tories concentrated on taxing those that are loaded and avoid it rather than nickel and diming poor people they may not be seen as the evil heartless self interested arses that they are.
Are we heading for a General Election in LESS than 9 weeks time? ~SNIP~
Thanks to the likes of Michael Crick, etc, this is a story which simply won't go away and odds of 4.0 or slightly more are available against a GE being held during the course of 2017 which looks like decent value to me on this basis alone, never mind about Brexit and other considerations.
"The delay means the row will now rumble on for months, ending any prospect of Mrs May calling a snap election." Of course we on PB.com knew that she was never in a position as such to call a snap General election anyway, but the story nevertheless serves to undermine her authority.
In case we forgot, it was this time last year that Labour briefly went into the lead in the polls (after Osborne tried to cut benefits for disabled people in the Budget).
A real sickener. See this is the problem, if you don't hit a (too lightly taxed) relatively well off portion of the population - just who the hell do you "hit" to get the nation's finances in order ? This is why I pray and hope Hammond won't back down.
Maybe if the Tories concentrated on taxing those that are loaded and avoid it rather than nickel and diming poor people they may not be seen as the evil heartless self interested arses that they are.
Stop me if you've heard this before....Scotland already has a power, but doesn't use it - and the SNP demands they want complete control over something they don't use.
Nicola Sturgeon has been challenged by the Home Office to provide evidence that Scotland needs its own immigration policy after it emerged there is flexibility in the current system that has barely been used. Robert Goodwill, the Immigration Minister, said there is a Scotland-only Shortage Occupation List (SOL) for employers wanting to bring in the skilled personnel they need from outside the European Economic Area. But he said it is “largely aligned” with the UK’s list despite “extensive” consultation with Scottish employers about the sort of posts they need people from other countries to fill. Mr Goodwill challenged the Nationalists to provide evidence that Scotland’s needs are so different that it would justify devolving control over immigration. He concluded the “inconvenient” truth for the SNP is that they were almost identical to the rest of the UK’s needs.
The UK Government said the Scotland-only list included just two categories of professions – physical scientists and medical professions – covering a total of five specific jobs. His intervention, in a Westminster Hall debate in the Commons, undermined Nicola Sturgeon’s hugely complicated plan for a special Brexit deal so that Scotland could stay in the EU single market when the rest of the UK comes out.
In case we forgot, it was this time last year that Labour briefly went into the lead in the polls (after Osborne tried to cut benefits for disabled people in the Budget).
A real sickener. See this is the problem, if you don't hit a (too lightly taxed) relatively well off portion of the population - just who the hell do you "hit" to get the nation's finances in order ? This is why I pray and hope Hammond won't back down.
Maybe if the Tories concentrated on taxing those that are loaded and avoid it rather than nickel and diming poor people they may not be seen as the evil heartless self interested arses that they are.
'Progressive' is not in your dictionary, is it?
And 'more than half the money raised will come from the top 10%' doesn't compute.....
Stop me if you've heard this before....Scotland already has a power, but doesn't use it - and the SNP demands they want complete control over something they don't use.
Nicola Sturgeon has been challenged by the Home Office to provide evidence that Scotland needs its own immigration policy after it emerged there is flexibility in the current system that has barely been used. Robert Goodwill, the Immigration Minister, said there is a Scotland-only Shortage Occupation List (SOL) for employers wanting to bring in the skilled personnel they need from outside the European Economic Area. But he said it is “largely aligned” with the UK’s list despite “extensive” consultation with Scottish employers about the sort of posts they need people from other countries to fill. Mr Goodwill challenged the Nationalists to provide evidence that Scotland’s needs are so different that it would justify devolving control over immigration. He concluded the “inconvenient” truth for the SNP is that they were almost identical to the rest of the UK’s needs.
The UK Government said the Scotland-only list included just two categories of professions – physical scientists and medical professions – covering a total of five specific jobs. His intervention, in a Westminster Hall debate in the Commons, undermined Nicola Sturgeon’s hugely complicated plan for a special Brexit deal so that Scotland could stay in the EU single market when the rest of the UK comes out.
In case we forgot, it was this time last year that Labour briefly went into the lead in the polls (after Osborne tried to cut benefits for disabled people in the Budget).
A real sickener. See this is the problem, if you don't hit a (too lightly taxed) relatively well off portion of the population - just who the hell do you "hit" to get the nation's finances in order ? This is why I pray and hope Hammond won't back down.
Maybe if the Tories concentrated on taxing those that are loaded and avoid it rather than nickel and diming poor people they may not be seen as the evil heartless self interested arses that they are.
In case we forgot, it was this time last year that Labour briefly went into the lead in the polls (after Osborne tried to cut benefits for disabled people in the Budget).
A real sickener. See this is the problem, if you don't hit a (too lightly taxed) relatively well off portion of the population - just who the hell do you "hit" to get the nation's finances in order ? This is why I pray and hope Hammond won't back down.
It's not the tax increase that's the problem. That seems to have popular support. It's breaking the manifesto commitment not to raise NI which has caused the u turn. It makes 2020 much harder to fight. Why would anyone believe what the 2020 manifesto says if they are breaking the biggest promises from the 2015 one. I'm sure if Dave thought it was possible he would have broken the promise on holding a referendum, that's how politically toxic breaking manifesto commitments is. YouGov just showed that over 50% of people think the Tories would be breaking their promise, it will be very tough to convince those people that they wouldn't also break things from their 2020 one in that campaign.
No, it's not about feathering the beds of the lightly taxed, it's about upholding promises that were made by all of the Cabinet in 2015.
Bet the Tories cannot wait until swing back starts to come into play from these dog days of mid term. Only a 19% lead over Corbyn is mildly embarrassing, a bit like England winning that ODI by less than 200 runs.
I think a lot of normally sensible people like Andrew Neil and Peter from Putney have completely lost the plot over this NIC issue.
I'm sure that's completely unrelated to their personal circumstances......interestingly, quite a few who have been upfront about this - 'it will affect me' have also been relatively sanguine - 'I'll lose a bit but its not a big deal'.....
Well, it won't effect me - but I think your obvious devotion to the PM is blinding you to the politics of this. The intention of the NIC change is (quite justifiably) to reduce the effective tax disparity between PAYE and self employed, which has increasingly been used as a vehicle for tax avoidance, at significant and growing cost to the Treasury, and to the annoyance of the rest of us who don’t benefit. However, this measure was not at all well thought out either practically or politically. The change has at least three other significant effects. It significantly increases the hardship of the ‘just about managing’ (or worse off) self employed (and does little to address the use of self employed by large companies as a means of avoiding their own obligations to employees); it reduces the incentives (or subsidies, it you prefer) to start up entrepreneurs; it blatantly breaches a manifesto commitment, whatever sophistry its defenders might employ. So like most measures, it is neither entirely good, nor entirely bad. The real problem is that neither the Chancellor, nor the PM, seem to have given much serious thought to the negative effects of the policy - as clearly evidenced by the backbench rebellion and rapid deployment of a six month delay to think about it. Those who quote the polls are ignoring the long term, and the salient fact that this measure pisses off some of the Tories’ staunchest supporters. Of course May will weather the immediate political crisis, but she is displaying, perhaps not for the first time, a political tin ear.
In case we forgot, it was this time last year that Labour briefly went into the lead in the polls (after Osborne tried to cut benefits for disabled people in the Budget).
A real sickener. See this is the problem, if you don't hit a (too lightly taxed) relatively well off portion of the population - just who the hell do you "hit" to get the nation's finances in order ? This is why I pray and hope Hammond won't back down.
It's not the tax increase that's the problem. That seems to have popular support. It's breaking the manifesto commitment not to raise NI which has caused the u turn. It makes 2020 much harder to fight. Why would anyone believe what the 2020 manifesto says if they are breaking the biggest promises from the 2015 one. I'm sure if Dave thought it was possible he would have broken the promise on holding a referendum, that's how politically toxic breaking manifesto commitments is. YouGov just showed that over 50% of people think the Tories would be breaking their promise, it will be very tough to convince those people that they wouldn't also break things from their 2020 one in that campaign.
No, it's not about feathering the beds of the lightly taxed, it's about upholding promises that were made by all of the Cabinet in 2015.
bollocks
Cameron broke loads of pledges - deficit gone by 2015 ? the LDs brought in Uni fees Blairs Labour - where do you start ?
this is westminster bubble stuff, most of the electorate dont care
if you actually think that a) most people read manifestos and b) voters believe policiticans then youve lost the plot Max.
So most people think the Tories broke their word, which they did, but that the measure is fair. I hope may listens. It'll annoy old Guido, he's been hysterical I'm excitement at a broken pledge.
In case we forgot, it was this time last year that Labour briefly went into the lead in the polls (after Osborne tried to cut benefits for disabled people in the Budget).
A real sickener. See this is the problem, if you don't hit a (too lightly taxed) relatively well off portion of the population - just who the hell do you "hit" to get the nation's finances in order ? This is why I pray and hope Hammond won't back down.
Maybe if the Tories concentrated on taxing those that are loaded and avoid it rather than nickel and diming poor people they may not be seen as the evil heartless self interested arses that they are.
The real irony here is that this is exactly what the measure is designed to do. Which is probably why the backbencher are so upset - it would leave all of them worse off!
I think a lot of normally sensible people like Andrew Neil and Peter from Putney have completely lost the plot over this NIC issue.
I'm sure that's completely unrelated to their personal circumstances......interestingly, quite a few who have been upfront about this - 'it will affect me' have also been relatively sanguine - 'I'll lose a bit but its not a big deal'.....
It significantly increases the hardship of the ‘just about managing’ (or worse off) self employed
Care to put some numbers to that?
Those earning less than £16,250 are unaffected or gaining. Because the self-employed have typical earnings of just under £14,000 this means over half will be better off or unaffected by these coming changes - including two-thirds of all self-employed women. And because rate increases fall heaviest on the higher earners, over half of the overall tax increase will come from the richest 10 per cent of households - meaning a (very small) reduction in inequality.
In case we forgot, it was this time last year that Labour briefly went into the lead in the polls (after Osborne tried to cut benefits for disabled people in the Budget).
A real sickener. See this is the problem, if you don't hit a (too lightly taxed) relatively well off portion of the population - just who the hell do you "hit" to get the nation's finances in order ? This is why I pray and hope Hammond won't back down.
It's not the tax increase that's the problem. That seems to have popular support. It's breaking the manifesto commitment not to raise NI which has caused the u turn. It makes 2020 much harder to fight. Why would anyone believe what the 2020 manifesto says if they are breaking the biggest promises from the 2015 one. I'm sure if Dave thought it was possible he would have broken the promise on holding a referendum, that's how politically toxic breaking manifesto commitments is. YouGov just showed that over 50% of people think the Tories would be breaking their promise, it will be very tough to convince those people that they wouldn't also break things from their 2020 one in that campaign.
No, it's not about feathering the beds of the lightly taxed, it's about upholding promises that were made by all of the Cabinet in 2015.
Can you explain why last year's national insurance increase for those in contracted out pensions, wasn't a national insurance increase?
The @YouGov@thetimes poll more voters believed that a government led by Corbyn would be better at reducing the number of people in poverty.
Not sure how.
Well, in terms of relative poverty as everyone would be stony broke nobody would be poorer than anybody else. A bit like the famous statement of that Vietnamese foreign minister.
In case we forgot, it was this time last year that Labour briefly went into the lead in the polls (after Osborne tried to cut benefits for disabled people in the Budget).
A real sickener. See this is the problem, if you don't hit a (too lightly taxed) relatively well off portion of the population - just who the hell do you "hit" to get the nation's finances in order ? This is why I pray and hope Hammond won't back down.
It's not the tax increase that's the problem. That seems to have popular support. It's breaking the manifesto commitment not to raise NI which has caused the u turn. It makes 2020 much harder to fight. Why would anyone believe what the 2020 manifesto says if they are breaking the biggest promises from the 2015 one. I'm sure if Dave thought it was possible he would have broken the promise on holding a referendum, that's how politically toxic breaking manifesto commitments is. YouGov just showed that over 50% of people think the Tories would be breaking their promise, it will be very tough to convince those people that they wouldn't also break things from their 2020 one in that campaign.
No, it's not about feathering the beds of the lightly taxed, it's about upholding promises that were made by all of the Cabinet in 2015.
bollocks
Cameron broke loads of pledges - deficit gone by 2015 ? the LDs brought in Uni fees Blairs Labour - where do you start ?
this is westminster bubble stuff, most of the electorate dont care
if you actually think that a) most people read manifestos and b) voters believe policiticans then youve lost the plot Max.
'Deficit gone by 2015' - something that you can try to achieve, not something over which you have direct control. In other words a failure not a lie. LD Tuition Fees - They failed to convince the larger party in the coalition, i.e. something over which they didn't have direct control. Although that could be looked on as a failure rather than a lie, they got hammered for it.
NIC - something over which this government has direct control - a straightforward lie.
Stop me if you've heard this before....Scotland already has a power, but doesn't use it - and the SNP demands they want complete control over something they don't use.
Nicola Sturgeon has been challenged by the Home Office to provide evidence that Scotland needs its own immigration policy after it emerged there is flexibility in the current system that has barely been used. Robert Goodwill, the Immigration Minister, said there is a Scotland-only Shortage Occupation List (SOL) for employers wanting to bring in the skilled personnel they need from outside the European Economic Area. But he said it is “largely aligned” with the UK’s list despite “extensive” consultation with Scottish employers about the sort of posts they need people from other countries to fill. Mr Goodwill challenged the Nationalists to provide evidence that Scotland’s needs are so different that it would justify devolving control over immigration. He concluded the “inconvenient” truth for the SNP is that they were almost identical to the rest of the UK’s needs.
The UK Government said the Scotland-only list included just two categories of professions – physical scientists and medical professions – covering a total of five specific jobs. His intervention, in a Westminster Hall debate in the Commons, undermined Nicola Sturgeon’s hugely complicated plan for a special Brexit deal so that Scotland could stay in the EU single market when the rest of the UK comes out.
In case we forgot, it was this time last year that Labour briefly went into the lead in the polls (after Osborne tried to cut benefits for disabled people in the Budget).
A real sickener. See this is the problem, if you don't hit a (too lightly taxed) relatively well off portion of the population - just who the hell do you "hit" to get the nation's finances in order ? This is why I pray and hope Hammond won't back down.
It's not the tax increase that's the problem. That seems to have popular support. It's breaking the manifesto commitment not to raise NI which has caused the u turn. It makes 2020 much harder to fight. Why would anyone believe what the 2020 manifesto says if they are breaking the biggest promises from the 2015 one. I'm sure if Dave thought it was possible he would have broken the promise on holding a referendum, that's how politically toxic breaking manifesto commitments is. YouGov just showed that over 50% of people think the Tories would be breaking their promise, it will be very tough to convince those people that they wouldn't also break things from their 2020 one in that campaign.
No, it's not about feathering the beds of the lightly taxed, it's about upholding promises that were made by all of the Cabinet in 2015.
bollocks
Cameron broke loads of pledges - deficit gone by 2015 ? the LDs brought in Uni fees Blairs Labour - where do you start ?
this is westminster bubble stuff, most of the electorate dont care
if you actually think that a) most people read manifestos and b) voters believe policiticans then youve lost the plot Max.
'Deficit gone by 2015' - something that you can try to achieve, not something over which you have direct control. In other words a failure not a lie. LD Tuition Fees - They failed to convince the larger party in the coalition, i.e. something over which they didn't have direct control. Although that could be looked on as a failure rather than a lie, they got hammered for it.
NIC - something over which this government has direct control - a straightforward lie.
Labour lied about tuition fees in their 2001 manifesto, with far more serious consequences to far more people than this will have. It didn't seem to hurt them.
In case we forgot, it was this time last year that Labour briefly went into the lead in the polls (after Osborne tried to cut benefits for disabled people in the Budget).
A real sickener. See this is the problem, if you don't hit a (too lightly taxed) relatively well off portion of the population - just who the hell do you "hit" to get the nation's finances in order ? This is why I pray and hope Hammond won't back down.
It's not the tax increase that's the problem. That seems to have popular support. It's breaking the manifesto commitment not to raise NI which has caused the u turn. It makes 2020 much harder to fight. Why would anyone believe what the 2020 manifesto says if they are breaking the biggest promises from the 2015 one. I'm sure if Dave thought it was possible he would have broken the promise on holding a referendum, that's how politically toxic breaking manifesto commitments is. YouGov just showed that over 50% of people think the Tories would be breaking their promise, it will be very tough to convince those people that they wouldn't also break things from their 2020 one in that campaign.
No, it's not about feathering the beds of the lightly taxed, it's about upholding promises that were made by all of the Cabinet in 2015.
bollocks
Cameron broke loads of pledges - deficit gone by 2015 ? the LDs brought in Uni fees Blairs Labour - where do you start ?
this is westminster bubble stuff, most of the electorate dont care
if you actually think that a) most people read manifestos and b) voters believe policiticans then youve lost the plot Max.
The Lib Dems who lost their seats might disagree but you are generally right about the Westminster bubble. What you miss is that the importance of that bubble in the shape of backbench support for Theresa May and her government. Theresa May was supposed to be different from Cameron. Now, this morning there are signs the Prime Minister understands that even if some Tory spinners on here have not yet caught up.
In case we forgot, it was this time last year that Labour briefly went into the lead in the polls (after Osborne tried to cut benefits for disabled people in the Budget).
A real sickener. See this is the problem, if you don't hit a (too lightly taxed) relatively well off portion of the population - just who the hell do you "hit" to get the nation's finances in order ? This is why I pray and hope Hammond won't back down.
It's not the tax increase that's the problem. That seems to have popular support. It's breaking the manifesto commitment not to raise NI which has caused the u turn. It makes 2020 much harder to fight. Why would anyone believe what the 2020 manifesto says if they are breaking the biggest promises from the 2015 one. I'm sure if Dave thought it was possible he would have broken the promise on holding a referendum, that's how politically toxic breaking manifesto commitments is. YouGov just showed that over 50% of people think the Tories would be breaking their promise, it will be very tough to convince those people that they wouldn't also break things from their 2020 one in that campaign.
No, it's not about feathering the beds of the lightly taxed, it's about upholding promises that were made by all of the Cabinet in 2015.
bollocks
Cameron broke loads of pledges - deficit gone by 2015 ? the LDs brought in Uni fees Blairs Labour - where do you start ?
this is westminster bubble stuff, most of the electorate dont care
if you actually think that a) most people read manifestos and b) voters believe policiticans then youve lost the plot Max.
And look at what happened to the Lib Dems in 2015. Smashed. Labour have been left with a zero rating for trust as well.
Most people don't read manifestos, but they know the Tories pledged not to raise the three main taxes in 2015. Now they are raising one of them. Voters don't believe politicians, and the point of the manifesto is that it's a binding commitment for the next 5 years. If it isn't binding then what's the point of having one. This is why the U-turn has come. It also makes party management a complete nightmare, once you have broken one promise, it's easy to break others. What then for the Triple Lock or the 0.7% DfID lock, or even the 2% defence spending lock?
Don't break the promise or hold an election and make new ones. Those are the two options. Especially since this raises such a small amount of money.
That YouGov poll was conducted entirely after the budget.
But some before the negative headlines this morning?
Why should people be influenced by such headlines. Is the nation thick ?
It's all about the narrative, and the headlines feed into that.
Yes. Also, most of us have little grasp of economics, so an initial view on fairness of a measure may be malleable if we then hear over and over how bad it is.
Probably a similar reason why Corbyn is not well regarded even by moat labour PB ers. I mean, he's awesome, obviously, but they're surrounded by baby eating right-wing fruitcakes, and weirdy beady lib Dems, which influences them.
In case we forgot, it was this time last year that Labour briefly went into the lead in the polls (after Osborne tried to cut benefits for disabled people in the Budget).
A real sickener. See this is the problem, if you don't hit a (too lightly taxed) relatively well off portion of the population - just who the hell do you "hit" to get the nation's finances in order ? This is why I pray and hope Hammond won't back down.
It's not the tax increase that's the problem. That seems to have popular support. It's breaking the manifesto commitment not to raise NI which has caused the u turn. It makes 2020 much harder to fight. Why would anyone believe what the 2020 manifesto says if they are breaking the biggest promises from the 2015 one. I'm sure if Dave thought it was possible he would have broken the promise on holding a referendum, that's how politically toxic breaking manifesto commitments is. YouGov just showed that over 50% of people think the Tories would be breaking their promise, it will be very tough to convince those people that they wouldn't also break things from their 2020 one in that campaign.
No, it's not about feathering the beds of the lightly taxed, it's about upholding promises that were made by all of the Cabinet in 2015.
bollocks
Cameron broke loads of pledges - deficit gone by 2015 ? the LDs brought in Uni fees Blairs Labour - where do you start ?
this is westminster bubble stuff, most of the electorate dont care
if you actually think that a) most people read manifestos and b) voters believe policiticans then youve lost the plot Max.
'Deficit gone by 2015' - something that you can try to achieve, not something over which you have direct control. In other words a failure not a lie. LD Tuition Fees - They failed to convince the larger party in the coalition, i.e. something over which they didn't have direct control. Although that could be looked on as a failure rather than a lie, they got hammered for it.
NIC - something over which this government has direct control - a straightforward lie.
Labour lied about tuition fees in their 2001 manifesto, with far more serious consequences to far more people than this will have. It didn't seem to hurt them.
this is all semantics. If Corbyn is still leader of the Labour Party at GE2020, the Tories will remain in power
In case we forgot, it was this time last year that Labour briefly went into the lead in the polls (after Osborne tried to cut benefits for disabled people in the Budget).
A real sickener. See this is the problem, if you don't hit a (too lightly taxed) relatively well off portion of the population - just who the hell do you "hit" to get the nation's finances in order ? This is why I pray and hope Hammond won't back down.
It's not the tax increase that's the problem. That seems to have popular support. It's breaking the manifesto commitment not to raise NI which has caused the u turn. It makes 2020 much harder to fight. Why would anyone believe what the 2020 manifesto says if they are breaking the biggest promises from the 2015 one. I'm sure if Dave thought it was possible he would have broken the promise on holding a referendum, that's how politically toxic breaking manifesto commitments is. YouGov just showed that over 50% of people think the Tories would be breaking their promise, it will be very tough to convince those people that they wouldn't also break things from their 2020 one in that campaign.
No, it's not about feathering the beds of the lightly taxed, it's about upholding promises that were made by all of the Cabinet in 2015.
bollocks
Cameron broke loads of pledges - deficit gone by 2015 ? the LDs brought in Uni fees Blairs Labour - where do you start ?
this is westminster bubble stuff, most of the electorate dont care
if you actually think that a) most people read manifestos and b) voters believe policiticans then youve lost the plot Max.
'Deficit gone by 2015' - something that you can try to achieve, not something over which you have direct control. In other words a failure not a lie. LD Tuition Fees - They failed to convince the larger party in the coalition, i.e. something over which they didn't have direct control. Although that could be looked on as a failure rather than a lie, they got hammered for it.
NIC - something over which this government has direct control - a straightforward lie.
Labour lied about tuition fees in their 2001 manifesto, with far more serious consequences to far more people than this will have. It didn't seem to hurt them.
this is all semantics. If Corbyn is still leader of the Labour Party at GE2020, the Tories will remain in power
Agreed, but he probably won't be. A new leader could give the Tories a real shock, they should be behaving as if Corbyn will be gone next year.
As someone who will end up paying the full whack over the next 2 years I remain pretty sanguine about the NICs changes. Class 2 contributions are an anachronism from some forgotten time and clearly need to be abolished. The fact that this means the majority of the self employed will be paying less is fine because it helps those on low earnings who do not benefit from living wage increases. Over time I agree that the tax system should aim towards neutrality rather than incentivising one system of employment over another.
I am more concerned about having a strong government ready to face the material challenges ahead who take deficit reduction seriously. A retreat would be a disappointment.
Labour lied about tuition fees in their 2001 manifesto, with far more serious consequences to far more people than this will have. It didn't seem to hurt them.
Started the process of creating a de facto 9% additional tax for the next generation. Of course those affected by the next hike - alot of them can't yet vote.
If you ever want an example of how to boil a frog, tuition fees provide the perfect example.
Comments
Derwent
CON gain from UKIP
9 March 2017
Conservative 789 37.1 28.1
Labour 611 28.7 -2.4
UKIP 537 25.2 -7.2
Lib Dem 192 9.0 -15.4
Hailey, Minster Lovell & Leafield
LDEM gain from CON
9 March 2017
Lib Dem 567 46.7 34.0
Con 504 41.5 3.8
Labour 71 5.8 -4.5
Green 38 3.1 -2.8
UKIP 35 2.9 2.9
It's got to mean something.
See this is the problem, if you don't hit a (too lightly taxed) relatively well off portion of the population - just who the hell do you "hit" to get the nation's finances in order ?
This is why I pray and hope Hammond won't back down.
This kind of obscurification doesn't help. That Tim Pool guy who went to Sweden had a very balanced summary of the situation he found and put a lot of blame on this kind of approach just fueling things.
Turnout was about 10% down on an ordinary poll and as the limited movement in the Conservative vote share suggests I think our campaign hit its targets more effectively and efficiently. Anyway I'm now back to lurking.
Ah well, it's off to bed for me now.
The Prime Minister said that legislation to increase national insurance contributions (NICs) will not be put before the Commons until the autumn and left the door open to concessions only a day after the measure was announced in the budget."
TMay has clearly heard the alarm bells sounding concerning these ill-conceived Budget proposals. To delay a vote thereon "until the autumn" probably means they're dead.
In previous times, a lack of support on this scale from a Chancellor's Prime Minister would have resulted in his immediate resignation. Not this time though I fancy ..... but Spreadsheet Phil did misjudge things very badly, even though his intentions were honourable.
This is a BIG story, which Mike really needs to be leading on, once he's had his cornflakes and has otherwise got his act together!
"Theresa May denies breaking election tax promise as 100 Tory MPs prepare to join Budget rebellion"
Mrs May cannot herself be absolved from blame, having effectively signed off on the Chancellor's budget measures. This is easily the biggest crisis of her premiership so far.
Both the PM and her Chancellor very badly misjudged the reaction. The NIC changes were bad enough, but coupled with the draconian increase in tax on dividends announced in both last year's budget and this year's was way too much for Tory MPs to stomach.
"The delay means the row will now rumble on for months, ending any prospect of Mrs May calling a snap election."
Of course we on PB.com knew that she was never in a position as such to call a snap General election anyway, but the story nevertheless serves to undermine her authority.
"Shorter, paler men are more likely to go bald prematurely"
Isn't this simply a case of stating what in effect is yesterday's glimpse of the blindingly obvious?
Or that shows the catastrophic collapse growth in support for the Tories, +2% to 44%?
After the budget?
Well naturally, it was hardly surprising that the majority of people who are subject to P.A.Y.E. were only too happy to see the self-employed lot get it in the neck. That follows as night follows day, but in terms of upsetting Tory voters this was a very grave mistake by Hammond and one I doubt he will recover from. Introducing a few clever lines into a budget speech is one thing, but this was quite another.
Well naturally, it was hardly surprising that the majority of people who are subject to P.A.Y.E. were only too happy to see the self-employed lot get it in the neck. That follows as night follows day, but in terms of upsetting Tory voters this was a very grave mistake by Hammond and one I doubt he will recover from. Introducing a few clever lines into a budget speech is one thing, but this was quite another.
So your evidence that Tory voters are upset is....zilch! Glad we cleared that up.
Unsure how many Tory's were in Charlie's army, though ...
The Prince Regent's army U-turned after news reached them of new NIC rates -
Their problem is that Labour's brand is utterly shot; it was shot in 2015, and events since then have just made the situation worse. To rebuild Labour they need to rebuild the brand, and that's difficult at the best of times.
Every day Corbynites remains in control of the party, the fewer people will want to shift their support back to them.
"This is a change that leaves lower-paid self-employed workers better off. It's accompanied by more rights and protections for self-employed workers and it reforms the system of National Insurance to make it simpler, to make if fairer and to make it more progressive. What we will do this summer is publish a paper which will explain the full effects of the changes," she said.
That will contain details about the reforms to National Insurance Contributions (NICs) "along with some changes we plan to make on rights and protections for self-employed workers, including on issues like pension rights and parental rights and maternity pay".
http://www.itv.com/news/2017-03-09/prime-minister-defends-ni-tax-rise-on-self-employed/
I suspect those expecting them to be dropped are in for a disappointment....
It also shows a political weakness in May and Hammond: they failed to sell what was basically a simple and small change, which itself was partially offset by an earlier change, in the absence of a functioning opposition.
"Gentlemen: Follow Me, By the Assistance of GOD, I will, this Day, make you pay more NIC".
"Gentlemen, You are just now to Engage with a parcel of Rable; a Parcel of Brutes, Being a small number of Labourites, You can expect no Booty from such a poor despicable Pack. I have Authority to Declare, That you shall have Eight Full Hour's liberty to Plunder and Pillage the Labour party, (and the Place's which harbour'd and succour'd Them) at your Discretion, with Impunity".
Tonight's results: one Con gain from Lab, one Con gain from UKIP, one LDem gain from Con, two Con holds.
Biggest change:
Britain Elects @britainelects 7h7 hours ago
Hailey, Minster Lovell & Leafield (W. Oxfordshire):
LD: 46.7% (+34.0)
CON: 41.5% (+3.8)
LAB: 5.8% (-4.5)
GRN: 3.1% (-2.8)
UKIP: 2.9% (+2.9)
Nicola Sturgeon has been challenged by the Home Office to provide evidence that Scotland needs its own immigration policy after it emerged there is flexibility in the current system that has barely been used. Robert Goodwill, the Immigration Minister, said there is a Scotland-only Shortage Occupation List (SOL) for employers wanting to bring in the skilled personnel they need from outside the European Economic Area. But he said it is “largely aligned” with the UK’s list despite “extensive” consultation with Scottish employers about the sort of posts they need people from other countries to fill. Mr Goodwill challenged the Nationalists to provide evidence that Scotland’s needs are so different that it would justify devolving control over immigration. He concluded the “inconvenient” truth for the SNP is that they were almost identical to the rest of the UK’s needs.
The UK Government said the Scotland-only list included just two categories of professions – physical scientists and medical professions – covering a total of five specific jobs. His intervention, in a Westminster Hall debate in the Commons, undermined Nicola Sturgeon’s hugely complicated plan for a special Brexit deal so that Scotland could stay in the EU single market when the rest of the UK comes out.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/10/home-office-challenges-snp-scotland-already-has-immigration/
5% of voters are worse off - who knew there were so many journalists?
@MattSingh_: So in one hour I've already had "Chicken coup", "YouGov are Tories" and "That's not what my Twitter says". Full house!
@AdrianSpalinky: @britainelects Woohooo, lying cheating tories provide poll stats that show lying cheating tories ahead in polls @YouGov The right wing fascists friends
And 'more than half the money raised will come from the top 10%' doesn't compute.....
Answer came there none.....
And there's the babies......
No, it's not about feathering the beds of the lightly taxed, it's about upholding promises that were made by all of the Cabinet in 2015.
The intention of the NIC change is (quite justifiably) to reduce the effective tax disparity between PAYE and self employed, which has increasingly been used as a vehicle for tax avoidance, at significant and growing cost to the Treasury, and to the annoyance of the rest of us who don’t benefit.
However, this measure was not at all well thought out either practically or politically.
The change has at least three other significant effects. It significantly increases the hardship of the ‘just about managing’ (or worse off) self employed (and does little to address the use of self employed by large companies as a means of avoiding their own obligations to employees); it reduces the incentives (or subsidies, it you prefer) to start up entrepreneurs; it blatantly breaches a manifesto commitment, whatever sophistry its defenders might employ.
So like most measures, it is neither entirely good, nor entirely bad. The real problem is that neither the Chancellor, nor the PM, seem to have given much serious thought to the negative effects of the policy - as clearly evidenced by the backbench rebellion and rapid deployment of a six month delay to think about it.
Those who quote the polls are ignoring the long term, and the salient fact that this measure pisses off some of the Tories’ staunchest supporters. Of course May will weather the immediate political crisis, but she is displaying, perhaps not for the first time, a political tin ear.
Cameron broke loads of pledges - deficit gone by 2015 ?
the LDs brought in Uni fees
Blairs Labour - where do you start ?
this is westminster bubble stuff, most of the electorate dont care
if you actually think that a) most people read manifestos and b) voters believe policiticans then youve lost the plot Max.
Those earning less than £16,250 are unaffected or gaining. Because the self-employed have typical earnings of just under £14,000 this means over half will be better off or unaffected by these coming changes - including two-thirds of all self-employed women. And because rate increases fall heaviest on the higher earners, over half of the overall tax increase will come from the richest 10 per cent of households - meaning a (very small) reduction in inequality.
http://www.newstatesman.com/national-insurance-rise-right-thing-to-do
LD Tuition Fees - They failed to convince the larger party in the coalition, i.e. something over which they didn't have direct control. Although that could be looked on as a failure rather than a lie, they got hammered for it.
NIC - something over which this government has direct control - a straightforward lie.
Most people don't read manifestos, but they know the Tories pledged not to raise the three main taxes in 2015. Now they are raising one of them. Voters don't believe politicians, and the point of the manifesto is that it's a binding commitment for the next 5 years. If it isn't binding then what's the point of having one. This is why the U-turn has come. It also makes party management a complete nightmare, once you have broken one promise, it's easy to break others. What then for the Triple Lock or the 0.7% DfID lock, or even the 2% defence spending lock?
Don't break the promise or hold an election and make new ones. Those are the two options. Especially since this raises such a small amount of money.
Probably a similar reason why Corbyn is not well regarded even by moat labour PB ers. I mean, he's awesome, obviously, but they're surrounded by baby eating right-wing fruitcakes, and weirdy beady lib Dems, which influences them.
We'll all be poorer, so relative poverty will fall.....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzMQza8xZCc
I am more concerned about having a strong government ready to face the material challenges ahead who take deficit reduction seriously. A retreat would be a disappointment.
If you ever want an example of how to boil a frog, tuition fees provide the perfect example.