Mr. Borough, what about those who shun technology? I recall hearing of a Quaker firm with which my brother did business. He was very impressed by their efficiency, but their sole technological device was a landline telephone. Everything else was paper and ink.
I believe they will be force to go digital for tax.
The "ridiculous case" last year and the Supreme Court case this year are the same case.
The original judge decided that Mrs Ilott (the estranged daughter cut out of her mother's will) was entitled to reasonable provision from her mother's estate and awarded her £50,000 - a little over 10% of the estate. The Court of Appeal increased the award to £163,000. The Supreme Court has acknowledged that the original judge could have awarded nothing at all and that, if he had, it is unlikely that an appeal would have succeeded. As his decision that Mrs Ilott was entitled to some provision was not legally flawed it has been upheld. However, their judgement today is very critical of the Court of Appeal. They find:
- the original judge did not make either of the errors attributed to him - the Court of Appeal attached too little weight to the deceased's wishes - the original judge was correct regarding the effect of his award on Mrs Ilott's benefits and the Court of Appeal was completely wrong in this regard - the process followed by the Court of Appeal in determining the award was contrary to the law - the original judge was correct to consider only Mrs Ilott's maintenance needs and the Court of Appeal's award of a lump sum to allow her to buy her house from the Housing Association was contrary to the law
As a result they have restored the original judgement, so Mrs Ilott is entitled to £50,000.
I understand there was an arrangement between the charities involved and Mrs Ilott regarding what would happen if the charities won the appeal. The details of this arrangement have not been made public.
Is there now anything left of the estate?
This has largely been a battle between Mrs Ilott and the charities. The executors have been named as parties to the case but have not been represented for most of the hearings. The charities have funded their own representation. I therefore suspect the estate is largely intact.
(((Dan Hodges)))Verified account @DPJHodges 2m2 minutes ago More OK, enough now. Corbyn's got to go. This was the most shambolic performance by a party leader in House of Commons history.
I think the unemployment statistics should be taken with a large pinch of salt, since in many western countries there are large numbers of people who are not included in any of the employment or unemployment statistics because they don't actively seek work. Lots of people have given up completely and they often don't show up in the figures.
Jeremy knocking on doors in Islington every week (and I am far from convinced that he does, by the way - I was born and brought up in the constituency next door, and also lived in Islington North, and I don't know anyone who has ever met him - anecdote, yes, but one based on close to 40 years of him being an MP) merely means that he is talking to a lot of people who already agree with him.
The road back for Labour is a very long one, whoever the leader is. But the idea that Labour is uniquely struggling with the modern world, how it works and how to deliver significant beneficial change to ordinary voters is a bit far-fetched. Currently, we are leaving the European Union on the back of advocacy from a group of wealthy Tory cabinet ministers and MPs who want to revive the royal yacht Britannia, bring back grammar schools while depriving other state schools of money and who believe that Europe should lie down and give us everything that we want in the Brexit negotiations.
The perspectives of people such as Boris, Fox, Davies, Leadsom and May are a very long way from reality and show little evidence of having developed to meet the challenges of this ever-shrinking, extremely interconnected world. Instead, like Corbyn, they hark back to a time that has long gone - if it ever existed - but unlike him they do it happily and enthusiastically waving a Union Jack, so the are always going to beat him. They are extremely lucky to be up against someone like Jeremy, who combines rank incompetence with electoral toxicity.
snip
I love the way leaver unionists cling to Spain like a liferaft. If Germany and France and the rest of the EU want this to happen, Spain will be bought off. However, it's going to be all about high politics - how far the Brexiters piss off Europe with their demands for cake and the facility to eat it.
We actually have a Remainer, May, leading the UK negotiations not a Brexiter even if they also form part of the team
May is no longer a remainer. And just like Corbyn, I'm not convinced she ever was. May just blows in the political wind. I doubt she's had an original thought in her life.
The country are no longer Remainers after 17 million voted Leave so by definition the Prime Minister cannot now be a Remainer but she is not a hard-core Brexiteer in the Farage, IDS, Fox or Bone mould either
Yeah but we're going to have a yacht - that will show them.
If you look at the evidence, having a "royal yacht" is very effective at bolstering trade links. It's better at persuading individual businessmen to sign deals .
An interesting answer and one that probably reveals a broader disconnect in what people understand by 'trade deals'. Your language suggests that you simply mean trade, which of course we are perfectly free to pursue within the EU. Free trade agreements are something very different and are the stuff of diplomacy.
There's isn't a disconnect. I think I was pretty clear that it is helpful with trade, not with trade agreements. I didn't see Johnson's original comments, but I'm sure he didn't get into the specifics.
The words 'after Brexit' imply that all of this trade promotion is something that needs to wait until we've left the EU.
It will take at least 2 years to design and commission a new yacht.
(((Dan Hodges)))Verified account @DPJHodges 48s49 seconds ago More May has just announced the most staggering U-turn in Budget history. It has been turned into a humiliation for the leader of the opposition.
A bigger humiliation than Brown's 10p tax abolition? Don't think so.
He's way more effective in Westminster than Salmond. The SNP are lucky they've got him.
Salmond I find annoying but he is impressive, as his leadership surely showed. I've seen less of RObertson, he seem less flashy, but more serious and reasonable as a result.
As a mild, from first principles, republican, I think monarchs should have royal yachts. They lack credibility otherwise. A bit like a landscape gardener who doesn't have a garden. If they really have to justify the expense on trade grounds that's a decision which can be weighed against, say, opening a new trade mission in Amaty. Obviously an important decision for those working in that area but it doesn't involve the rest of us.
Boris Johnson and Liam Fox take us for fools when they come out with the Royal Yacht gambit as a way of compensating for the loss of our most important trading relationship.
TBF I don't think we could have influenced the election of Trump (and nor should we have tried)
1. Knocking doors and delivering leaflets to build up the reputation of a local MP/councillor in between elections is a quite effective approach especially when you need to distract the electorate from the limitations of a national leader plumbing the depths of unpopularity.
2. In terms of "The search for the answers to Labour's woes", Yougov have another poll out of Labour party members: "Would X make a good or poor leader of the Labour Party if Jeremy Corbyn were to stand down" Net scores: Starmer +32 Lewis +24 Rayner +9 Jarvis +6 McDonnell +5 Umunna +4 Long Bailey +1 Nandy -2 Ashworth -6 Watson -22 Abbott -43
I reckon she is the one off that list that CCHQ would be most worried about facing. Talks sense, comes across well, young, female...what am I saying? This is the Labour membership we are talking about!
Nandy, Jarvis, Rayner, Long-Bailey and Ashworth have huge "don't know" scores in the poll if you follow the link. McDonnell and Umunna get polarised results - lots of fans, lots of opponents - while Watson and Abbott seem really not fancied as leaders by the membership. Starmer and Lewis both have lots of fans and not many opponents. In an actual context, I'd expect some of the "don't know" pack to become better known with a more marked result, but at present I think Lewis is probably the favourite - more left of centre than Starmer (right back to Harold Wilson it was said that the party is most effectivley led from the centre-left) but doesn't have the entrenched opposition that McDonnell and Umunna seem to have.
As an example, I suspect that both Southam Observer and I could live comfortably with Starmer or Lewis, though I remain a supporter of Corbyn and SO...not so much.
Who among those would be able to get on the ballot, under the current rules? I'd assume McDonnell and Abbott wouldn't - there'll be no Corbyn style broadening of the debate happening again - Nandy, Jarvis, Starmer and Umunna probably could unless they were crowded out by other candidates. I don't really know about the others.
(((Dan Hodges)))Verified account @DPJHodges 48s49 seconds ago More May has just announced the most staggering U-turn in Budget history. It has been turned into a humiliation for the leader of the opposition.
A bigger humiliation than Brown's 10p tax abolition? Don't think so.
The 10p tax abolition actually went ahead, though
As did the abolition of Labour as a party of government afterwards.
Bad move by Hammond today, undoubtedly the worst move by the government so far and just stores up future tax increases elsewhere to pay for social care
Bad move by Hammond today, undoubtedly the worst move by the government so far and just stores up future tax increases elsewhere to pay for social care
I dont agree - TM had to address the breach, or perceived breach, of the manifesto
(((Dan Hodges)))Verified account @DPJHodges 48s49 seconds ago More May has just announced the most staggering U-turn in Budget history. It has been turned into a humiliation for the leader of the opposition.
A bigger humiliation than Brown's 10p tax abolition? Don't think so.
Perhaps the Labour Party actually have a very cunning plan. They let Corbyn play pretend at being leader until late 2018, 2019. He continues to be as useful as the proverbial chocolate teapot. Tories get increasingly complacent and let themselves go. Labour depose Corbyn in a swift coup, Jarvis takes over, and Labour ride to victory in a 2020 landslide.
I'm too much of an optimist to believe the alternative.
Bad move by Hammond today, undoubtedly the worst move by the government so far and just stores up future tax increases elsewhere to pay for social care
Agree. Unless a snap election is in the offing after all....
(((Dan Hodges)))Verified account @DPJHodges 48s49 seconds ago More May has just announced the most staggering U-turn in Budget history. It has been turned into a humiliation for the leader of the opposition.
A bigger humiliation than Brown's 10p tax abolition? Don't think so.
The 10p tax abolition actually went ahead, though
He had to amend the personal allowance after the budget to nullify the change, in the face of a huge rebellion from his own side.
Bad move by Hammond today, undoubtedly the worst move by the government so far and just stores up future tax increases elsewhere to pay for social care
I dont agree - TM had to address the breach, or perceived breach, of the manifesto
Nah - she is just terrified of bad headlines in the Tory press.
Bad move by Hammond today, undoubtedly the worst move by the government so far and just stores up future tax increases elsewhere to pay for social care
Agree. Unless a snap election is in the offing after all....
I approved of the move but came round to the view that the manifesto breach wasn't worth it. Given the polling, the next manifesto can be braver.
So NIC u-turn will now be wiped off front pages by 'Corbyn fails to actually ask questions at PMQs'
Corbyn not being great is old news, May proving she's as frit as any PM with a slender majority is not.
Think TM ordered the change as she would be furious about a manifesto breach - sure Hammond was told to scrap it or resign
She obviously wasn't too bother about the manifesto breach last year.
Which one
Civil service NICs went up. It had something to do with a chance in their pensions, but the bottom line is my NI went up £30 a month last April.
I think it was the loss of a rebate than the addition of something new. Because of new state pension:
"The introduction of the Single Tier State Pension from April 2016 is accompanied by the ending of contracting out from defined benefit pension schemes. Official statistics show 5.3m public sector workers and 2.8m private sector workers are active members of these schemes.
As a result:
affected employees will lose their 1.4 per cent rebate and pay NI contributions of 12 per cent from April 2016 instead of the current 10.6 per cent."
French prosecutors opened an investigation yesterday into Macron's trip last year to Las Vegas when he was economics minister. They are particularly interested in why he gave a €400,000 contract to public relations firm Havas without inviting bids from anyone else.
Meanwhile, nearly 20,000 people have signed a petition calling for an open inquiry into three "scandales Macron", namely
* Vegasgate
* alleged influence trafficking for the pharmaceutical company Servier
* alleged dodgy returns for wealth tax and income tax
Bad move by Hammond today, undoubtedly the worst move by the government so far and just stores up future tax increases elsewhere to pay for social care
Agree. Unless a snap election is in the offing after all....
Given Article 50 is to be invoked at the end of the month almost certainly not
Bad move by Hammond today, undoubtedly the worst move by the government so far and just stores up future tax increases elsewhere to pay for social care
I dont agree - TM had to address the breach, or perceived breach, of the manifesto
Technically there was no strict breach and even Tory voters back it, if Hammond tries to raise tax on something else next time which Tory voters oppose then he will really find out what opposition is. Only thing I think he can do now is cut overseas aid spending in Autumn Statement, that really would be a manifesto breach few would care about
What an utter shambles. And I don't mean Hammond but Davis before Brexit select committee this morning. And we really expect this shower to get ensuring they've promised us from the EU negotiations? The amazing thing is that they're still 40% in the polls.
French prosecutors opened an investigation yesterday into Macron's trip last year to Las Vegas when he was economics minister. They are particularly interested in why he gave a €400,000 contract to public relations firm Havas without inviting bids from anyone else.
Meanwhile, nearly 20,000 people have signed a petition calling for an open inquiry into three "scandales Macron", namely
* Vegasgate
* alleged influence trafficking for the pharmaceutical company Servier
* alleged dodgy returns for wealth tax and income tax
So NIC u-turn will now be wiped off front pages by 'Corbyn fails to actually ask questions at PMQs'
Corbyn not being great is old news, May proving she's as frit as any PM with a slender majority is not.
Think TM ordered the change as she would be furious about a manifesto breach - sure Hammond was told to scrap it or resign
She obviously wasn't too bother about the manifesto breach last year.
Which one
Civil service NICs went up. It had something to do with a chance in their pensions, but the bottom line is my NI went up £30 a month last April.
I think it was the loss of a rebate than the addition of something new. Because of new state pension:
"The introduction of the Single Tier State Pension from April 2016 is accompanied by the ending of contracting out from defined benefit pension schemes. Official statistics show 5.3m public sector workers and 2.8m private sector workers are active members of these schemes.
As a result:
affected employees will lose their 1.4 per cent rebate and pay NI contributions of 12 per cent from April 2016 instead of the current 10.6 per cent."
So technically not a manifesto breach? Is that not the same as the NI rise for the self employed?
So did I, but was shouted down at the time and told in no uncertain terms that there was absolutely no chance of the Treasury back-tracking on this.
So that's Part One of the battle won, Part Two relates to the even more anti-Tory bashing measure, spread over the last two budgets, firstly the scrapping last year of ACT, replaced by a miserable £5k annual allowance, followed this year by a more than halving of this allowance from £5k to £2k. How's about a serious bit of cost saving instead Mr Hammond by way of a change?
I'm gutted that they've u-turned on this.
The dividend tax reforms were sorely needed - and I say this as someone who pays far more since the changes.
Could be an interesting one, given IIRC there was that ridiculous case last year where an estranged daughter left out of a will was awarded significant amounts by the courts despite explicit instructions from the mother.
Three animal charities have won a case at the Supreme Court against a woman cut out of her mother's will.
Thats the law. We should repeal the 75 Act if we don't like the law. The courts weren't making things up they enforced the law passed by Parliament.
I've not seen the judgement, but it looks like the Supreme Court have really slapped down the Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal has been very unsympathetic towards charities in inheritance cases, and the Supreme Court has basically instructed them to apply the law, not what they'd like the law to be.
Perhaps the Labour Party actually have a very cunning plan. They let Corbyn play pretend at being leader until late 2018, 2019. He continues to be as useful as the proverbial chocolate teapot. Tories get increasingly complacent and let themselves go. Labour depose Corbyn in a swift coup, Jarvis takes over, and Labour ride to victory in a 2020 landslide.
I'm too much of an optimist to believe the alternative.
Jarvis polls poorly with Labour members and what are they going to ride to victory on? Reversing Brexit?
So NIC u-turn will now be wiped off front pages by 'Corbyn fails to actually ask questions at PMQs'
Corbyn not being great is old news, May proving she's as frit as any PM with a slender majority is not.
Think TM ordered the change as she would be furious about a manifesto breach - sure Hammond was told to scrap it or resign
She obviously wasn't too bother about the manifesto breach last year.
Which one
Civil service NICs went up. It had something to do with a chance in their pensions, but the bottom line is my NI went up £30 a month last April.
Was that decision announced pre or post 2015 GE and was Osborne the Chancellot
Every public sector worker's NICs increased from 10.4% to 12% last April. I don't remember the Tory loud mouths and press barons queuing up then bleating about broken manifesto promises. My pay last year was cut despite the 1% pay "rise" and increase in IT personal allowance.
What an utter shambles. And I don't mean Hammond but Davis before Brexit select committee this morning. And we really expect this shower to get ensuring they've promised us from the EU negotiations? The amazing thing is that they're still 40% in the polls.
French prosecutors opened an investigation yesterday into Macron's trip last year to Las Vegas when he was economics minister. They are particularly interested in why he gave a €400,000 contract to public relations firm Havas without inviting bids from anyone else.
Meanwhile, nearly 20,000 people have signed a petition calling for an open inquiry into three "scandales Macron", namely
* Vegasgate
* alleged influence trafficking for the pharmaceutical company Servier
* alleged dodgy returns for wealth tax and income tax
French prosecutors opened an investigation yesterday into Macron's trip last year to Las Vegas when he was economics minister. They are particularly interested in why he gave a €400,000 contract to public relations firm Havas without inviting bids from anyone else.
Meanwhile, nearly 20,000 people have signed a petition calling for an open inquiry into three "scandales Macron", namely
* Vegasgate
* alleged influence trafficking for the pharmaceutical company Servier
* alleged dodgy returns for wealth tax and income tax
This morning I started writing a thread header that referenced the NI storm being weathered. Just don't get why they'd u turn now.
Weak weak weak weak weak.
Proves me wrong, I thought they'd weather this storm.* This does make me rather better off,** but I'm not convinced it's equitable, or the best thing for the country.
(* in fact I wrote this comment, refreshed to see if anyone had said the same thing in the time it had taken me to type, then realised you'd used exactly the same words!)
French prosecutors opened an investigation yesterday into Macron's trip last year to Las Vegas when he was economics minister. They are particularly interested in why he gave a €400,000 contract to public relations firm Havas without inviting bids from anyone else.
Meanwhile, nearly 20,000 people have signed a petition calling for an open inquiry into three "scandales Macron", namely
* Vegasgate
* alleged influence trafficking for the pharmaceutical company Servier
* alleged dodgy returns for wealth tax and income tax
Fake News affecting politico.eu - the banner space taken up at the top by a news headline, "Obama is a Bildeberg" - with a list of other prominent Bildebergers underneath, and a link to that story. On a different and rather fakenewsy site, obviously. ("Outsider News - clue in the name there, I reckon.) I presume politico doesn't intend to let ads like that actually run...
The problem with u-turns like this is that they don't fully fix the issue. People like the boiler man who was ranting about the NIC change whilst fixing my boiler last Thursday won't be thinking: "Oh, that's alright then."
They might feel relief, but many will still feel sore, and some will wonder, rightly or wrongly, how the government will get the money by stealth.
The damage has been done. Some trust in the government will have been lost by many of its supporters.
A question is where the most pressure for the u-turn came from: it certainly wasn't from the opposition. If it was from the Conservative backbenchers rather than the media, then May has some fairly significant problems bubbling under the surface.
This morning I started writing a thread header that referenced the NI storm being weathered. Just don't get why they'd u turn now.
(a) They [maybe] don't have the votes for it, and (b) the credibility of the 2020 manifesto was at stake.
The fact that the polling we did see was broadly in favour suggests that a more substantial realignment [or maybe even abolition of NI?] may well be part of that next manifesto. I hope so.
Nicolas Dupont-Aignan's case against TV network TF1 will be heard tomorrow by the State Council, France's supreme administrative court. NDA argues that the network should invite all candidates to its TV debate on 20 March, not just the five who are currently scoring 10% or more in the polls. If he loses, he will organise a protest outside the TF1 studios on the day of the debate.
BFMTV and CNews will invite all candidates to their debate on 4 April, and so will France 2 to theirs on 20 April, three days before the first round.
What an utter shambles. And I don't mean Hammond but Davis before Brexit select committee this morning. And we really expect this shower to get ensuring they've promised us from the EU negotiations? The amazing thing is that they're still 40% in the polls.
44% yesterday
44% is as much down to the fact that there is little credible opposition at the moment, it does not follow that the Tories are doing a good job.
I would challenge anyone to watch the Secretary of State for Brexit in committee this morning and not fhave grave misgivings about how this might turn out. I might add that I consider Davis to be comfortably the best of the 3 Brexiteers.
The problem with u-turns like this is that they don't fully fix the issue. People like the boiler man who was ranting about the NIC change whilst fixing my boiler last Thursday won't be thinking: "Oh, that's alright then."
They might feel relief, but many will still feel sore, and some will wonder, rightly or wrongly, how the government will get the money by stealth.
The damage has been done. Some trust in the government will have been lost by many of its supporters.
A question is where the most pressure for the u-turn came from: it certainly wasn't from the opposition. If it was from the Conservative backbenchers rather than the media, then May has some fairly significant problems bubbling under the surface.
The instigator in my opinion was TM herself. She would not accept a manifesto breach
The damage has been done. Some trust in the government will have been lost by many of its supporters.
A question is where the most pressure for the u-turn came from: it certainly wasn't from the opposition. If it was from the Conservative backbenchers rather than the media, then May has some fairly significant problems bubbling under the surface.
It also means she'll have a big credibility problem in negotiations with the EU if they've seen her fold so easily in the past.
The problem with u-turns like this is that they don't fully fix the issue. People like the boiler man who was ranting about the NIC change whilst fixing my boiler last Thursday won't be thinking: "Oh, that's alright then."
They might feel relief, but many will still feel sore, and some will wonder, rightly or wrongly, how the government will get the money by stealth.
The damage has been done. Some trust in the government will have been lost by many of its supporters.
A question is where the most pressure for the u-turn came from: it certainly wasn't from the opposition. If it was from the Conservative backbenchers rather than the media, then May has some fairly significant problems bubbling under the surface.
The instigator in my opinion was TM herself. She would not accept a manifesto breach
But she must have read and discussed the budget before Hammond read it out? That explanation just makes her look incompetent.
French prosecutors opened an investigation yesterday into Macron's trip last year to Las Vegas when he was economics minister. They are particularly interested in why he gave a €400,000 contract to public relations firm Havas without inviting bids from anyone else.
Meanwhile, nearly 20,000 people have signed a petition calling for an open inquiry into three "scandales Macron", namely
* Vegasgate
* alleged influence trafficking for the pharmaceutical company Servier
* alleged dodgy returns for wealth tax and income tax
So did I, but was shouted down at the time and told in no uncertain terms that there was absolutely no chance of the Treasury back-tracking on this.
So that's Part One of the battle won, Part Two relates to the even more anti-Tory bashing measure, spread over the last two budgets, firstly the scrapping last year of ACT, replaced by a miserable £5k annual allowance, followed this year by a more than halving of this allowance from £5k to £2k. How's about a serious bit of cost saving instead Mr Hammond by way of a change?
I'm gutted that they've u-turned on this.
The dividend tax reforms were sorely needed - and I say this as someone who pays far more since the changes.
Agreed. They'll get as much criticism from their own side for the u-turn as they would have had about the original policy. Also watch for the hypocritical media lambasting the reversal as much as they lambasted the announcement.
Bad move by Hammond today, undoubtedly the worst move by the government so far and just stores up future tax increases elsewhere to pay for social care
I dont agree - TM had to address the breach, or perceived breach, of the manifesto
Nah - she is just terrified of bad headlines in the Tory press.
Like I said earlier she blows in the political wind. Weak, weak, weak.
This morning I started writing a thread header that referenced the NI storm being weathered. Just don't get why they'd u turn now.
(a) They [maybe] don't have the votes for it, and (b) the credibility of the 2020 manifesto was at stake.
The fact that the polling we did see was broadly in favour suggests that a more substantial realignment [or maybe even abolition of NI?] may well be part of that next manifesto. I hope so.
A question is where the most pressure for the u-turn came from: it certainly wasn't from the opposition. If it was from the Conservative backbenchers rather than the media, then May has some fairly significant problems bubbling under the surface.
I think it probably was the media response that did it, "white van man tax" is not something the government want to be hung on their shoulders. It's a bit like the "pasty tax" in that the outrage was completely out of proportion to the tax change.
As to the fix, good old fiscal drag will likely be used as was suggested down thread.
The problem with u-turns like this is that they don't fully fix the issue. People like the boiler man who was ranting about the NIC change whilst fixing my boiler last Thursday won't be thinking: "Oh, that's alright then."
They might feel relief, but many will still feel sore, and some will wonder, rightly or wrongly, how the government will get the money by stealth.
The damage has been done. Some trust in the government will have been lost by many of its supporters.
A question is where the most pressure for the u-turn came from: it certainly wasn't from the opposition. If it was from the Conservative backbenchers rather than the media, then May has some fairly significant problems bubbling under the surface.
The instigator in my opinion was TM herself. She would not accept a manifesto breach
But she must have read and discussed the budget before Hammond read it out? That explanation just makes her look incompetent.
With her tray full delegation is esssntial. I do believe it was a collective failure of the cabinet and TM has reversed it - the right thing to do
Comments
Edited extra bit: anyway, I must be off.
Corbyn: "We want a staircase for all, not a ladder for the few." I'm still waiting for my owl, personally.
More
OK, enough now. Corbyn's got to go. This was the most shambolic performance by a party leader in House of Commons history.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/38951741
VVD last matched at 1.7.
Theresa May "raise's her game" when she reply's to Roberston while going through the motions with Corbyn.
I'm too much of an optimist to believe the alternative.
But really, who knows?
"The introduction of the Single Tier State Pension from April 2016 is accompanied by the ending of contracting out from defined benefit pension schemes. Official statistics show 5.3m public sector workers and 2.8m private sector workers are active members of these schemes.
As a result:
affected employees will lose their 1.4 per cent rebate and pay NI contributions of 12 per cent from April 2016 instead of the current 10.6 per cent."
Meanwhile, nearly 20,000 people have signed a petition calling for an open inquiry into three "scandales Macron", namely
* Vegasgate
* alleged influence trafficking for the pharmaceutical company Servier
* alleged dodgy returns for wealth tax and income tax
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/snp-to-vote-against-369m-buckingham-palace-repairs-a3490331.html
The dividend tax reforms were sorely needed - and I say this as someone who pays far more since the changes.
Unlikely to be COTE by the next election I'd say - what a plonker.
http://www.politico.eu/article/probe-into-vegas-event-attended-by-emmanuel-macron/
Proves me wrong, I thought they'd weather this storm.* This does make me rather better off,** but I'm not convinced it's equitable, or the best thing for the country.
(* in fact I wrote this comment, refreshed to see if anyone had said the same thing in the time it had taken me to type, then realised you'd used exactly the same words!)
(** except for what @FrancisU has pointed out.)
https://twitter.com/mvanhulten/status/841994731668287490
They might feel relief, but many will still feel sore, and some will wonder, rightly or wrongly, how the government will get the money by stealth.
The damage has been done. Some trust in the government will have been lost by many of its supporters.
A question is where the most pressure for the u-turn came from: it certainly wasn't from the opposition. If it was from the Conservative backbenchers rather than the media, then May has some fairly significant problems bubbling under the surface.
The fact that the polling we did see was broadly in favour suggests that a more substantial realignment [or maybe even abolition of NI?] may well be part of that next manifesto. I hope so.
BFMTV and CNews will invite all candidates to their debate on 4 April, and so will France 2 to theirs on 20 April, three days before the first round.
I would challenge anyone to watch the Secretary of State for Brexit in committee this morning and not fhave grave misgivings about how this might turn out. I might add that I consider Davis to be comfortably the best of the 3 Brexiteers.
PAYE SAPS ONCE AGAIN WILL HAVE TO PAY FOR EVERY OTHER ***********
Utter dolt.
As to the fix, good old fiscal drag will likely be used as was suggested down thread.