politicalbetting
Home› General

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Sign In Register

Categories

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Maybe next time the Tories will have to emulate the GE2015 EdS

SystemSystem Posts: 12,552
edited March 2017 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Maybe next time the Tories will have to emulate the GE2015 EdStone to show they’ll honour manifesto commitments

The Chancellor, Philip Hammond, has been in full defensive mode as he has sought to fight off the criticism that his National Insurance changes for the self-employed are in breach of a GE2015 Conservative manifesto pledge.

Read the full story here


«13456

Comments

  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    A timely reminder that things could be worse.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 122,581
    Bring back Dave and George.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,938
    edited March 2017
    I think we're in danger of going OTT. This is nowhere in the league of the tuition fees debacle - Which pretty much overnight saw the Lib-Dems going to 20% to 10% in the polls.

    It's probably not even as bad as the Pasty tax.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 39,003
    I'm not yet sure how this will play out. I'm not thrilled by the changes, but there are still considerable tax advantages to self-employment.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,938
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Bring back Dave and George.

    You've changed your tune. You was #TeamHammond yesterday!
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 122,581
    edited March 2017
    The OmNICshambles does not augar well for the great repeal bill.

    Do we really want to give Mrs May Henry VIII powers?

    Sic semper tyrannis.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 85,285
    edited March 2017
    "One thing’s for sure Cameron/Osborne would not have made this mistake"

    That some airbrushing of omnishambles budgets...There were I, II, lost count... Osborne did more post budget u-turns than Eric pickles has had greggs for lunch.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,712
    edited March 2017
    Lol - the order of magnitude difference between this and the tuition fee effect is absolubtely staggering.

    This is £240 / yr at most is it not ?

    Tuition fees from zero to effectively up to around £84k over a lifetime in the last 20 years.
  • glwglw Posts: 10,454
    GIN1138 said:

    I think we're in danger of going OTT. This is nowhere in the league of the tuition fees debacle - Which pretty much overnight saw the Lib-Dems going to 20% to 10% in the polls.

    It's probably not even as bad as the Pasty tax.

    PAYE employees far outnumber the self employed, so I'm not even sure that this is a vote loser.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981
    9 day wonder. Brown and Osborne set a very, very high bar for budgetary foul-ups. "OmNICshambles" just doesn't make it as a meme, and if that plus sacking Tarzan is as bad as it gets there is not a lot to worry about.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,938
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    The OmNICshambles does not augar well for the great repeal bill.

    Do we really want to give Mrs May Henry VIII powers?

    Sic semper tyrannis.

    Who will be the Minister in charge of the Repeal Bill?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 122,581
    GIN1138 said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Bring back Dave and George.

    You've changed your tune. You was #TeamHammond yesterday!
    I fell for the jokes.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    I see that the whole Brexit causing a collapse in support for Scottish independence is gathering pace

    https://twitter.com/ReutersJamie/status/839781081964490757
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,712
    glw said:

    GIN1138 said:

    I think we're in danger of going OTT. This is nowhere in the league of the tuition fees debacle - Which pretty much overnight saw the Lib-Dems going to 20% to 10% in the polls.

    It's probably not even as bad as the Pasty tax.

    PAYE employees far outnumber the self employed, so I'm not even sure that this is a vote loser.
    Politics of envy plays far better than people are prepared to admit I expect.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Bring back Dave and George.

    Yes. George's focus group would have picked up the trouble about a week after the budget, as it usually did.
  • BojabobBojabob Posts: 642
    Good post from @Richard_Tyndall OPT. As is often the case with Richard, I don't agree with all of it but his views are always very cogently argued.

    The key point I do agree with is this idea – that has been allowed to fester – that welfare should be a 'pay in, get out' regime. That's simply bonkers. My household income is very high compared to the average and, therefore, I pay a lot of tax, compared to the average. Do I think I should get all that back in services? No. Clearly I pay that as a mixture of a safety net and a general view that all civilised nations have a floor beneath which no citizen should be allowed to fall. Tax and welfare is a cost of running a country and an economy, not some sort of Christmas Savings Club run by HMRC.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 122,581
    GIN1138 said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    The OmNICshambles does not augar well for the great repeal bill.

    Do we really want to give Mrs May Henry VIII powers?

    Sic semper tyrannis.

    Who will be the Minister in charge of the Repeal Bill?
    Theoretically David Davis, but it will involve every minister.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,712
    @Alistair I genuinely hope the SNP can do it in the next couple of years.
  • BojabobBojabob Posts: 642
    FWIW I think the NIC thing is a storm in a teacup. It's hardly a horrific measure, perhaps amateurishly handled, but there have been much worse.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 40,054
    I am struggling to see how any of this matters. There is no opposition, so the Tories can do what they like. They'll probably end up going back on this because May hates bad headlines in the Tory press.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,822
    edited March 2017
    It's a bit of a disaster, but a minor one in the overall scheme of things. I don't think a 2% tax increase for some well-paid people who pay much less tax than employed people (which is what this is) is really going to be remembered amidst all the Brexit fallout.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,311
    The Ed Stone, an undeclared expense & monument to Miliband's folly. Too heavy for the platform, a definite jaw dropping WTF moment in 2015 GE.

    Otherwise it is a great idea to set manifesto commitments in stone.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 122,581
    ‪@JBeattieMirror: Hammond's cocksure joke about Norman Lamont getting sacked ten weeks after delivering a budget looking less amusing for him by the minute‬
  • isamisam Posts: 42,128
    edited March 2017
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    It's a bit of a disaster, but a minor one in the overall scheme of things. I don't think a 2% increase for some well-paid people (which is what this is) is really going to be remembered amidst all the Brexit fallout.

    Someone posted yesterday that Osborne put up NI for some last year. Is this true?
  • FregglesFreggles Posts: 3,487
    isam said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    It's a bit of a disaster, but a minor one in the overall scheme of things. I don't think a 2% increase for some well-paid people (which is what this is) is really going to be remembered amidst all the Brexit fallout.

    Someknd posted yesterday that Osborne put up NI for some last year. Is this true?
    Yes, public sector workers
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,856
    OmNICshambles, like the LDs tuition fees pledge, will be remembered

    No it won't.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,938
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    GIN1138 said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    The OmNICshambles does not augar well for the great repeal bill.

    Do we really want to give Mrs May Henry VIII powers?

    Sic semper tyrannis.

    Who will be the Minister in charge of the Repeal Bill?
    Theoretically David Davis, but it will involve every minister.
    David Davis has done quite well so far I think.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981
    Bojabob said:

    Good post from @Richard_Tyndall OPT. As is often the case with Richard, I don't agree with all of it but his views are always very cogently argued.

    The key point I do agree with is this idea – that has been allowed to fester – that welfare should be a 'pay in, get out' regime. That's simply bonkers. My household income is very high compared to the average and, therefore, I pay a lot of tax, compared to the average. Do I think I should get all that back in services? No. Clearly I pay that as a mixture of a safety net and a general view that all civilised nations have a floor beneath which no citizen should be allowed to fall. Tax and welfare is a cost of running a country and an economy, not some sort of Christmas Savings Club run by HMRC.

    That is pretty much spot on. Rephrased in realpolitik terms, the rich should aim to pay just enough tax to the proles, to dissuade the proles from killing and eating them.
  • glwglw Posts: 10,454
    Bojabob said:

    Tax and welfare is a cost of running a country and an economy, not some sort of Christmas Savings Club run by HMRC.

    But that is almost exactly what most people think NI is, as I've heard first hand many times. Lots of people seem to think there is a pot of gold with their name on it just waiting for retirement. They don't realise that NI goes towards general current spending.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,856
    isam said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    It's a bit of a disaster, but a minor one in the overall scheme of things. I don't think a 2% increase for some well-paid people (which is what this is) is really going to be remembered amidst all the Brexit fallout.

    Someknd posted yesterday that Osborne put up NI for some last year. Is this true?
    Yes, me.
  • glwglw Posts: 10,454
    Pulpstar said:

    glw said:

    GIN1138 said:

    I think we're in danger of going OTT. This is nowhere in the league of the tuition fees debacle - Which pretty much overnight saw the Lib-Dems going to 20% to 10% in the polls.

    It's probably not even as bad as the Pasty tax.

    PAYE employees far outnumber the self employed, so I'm not even sure that this is a vote loser.
    Politics of envy plays far better than people are prepared to admit I expect.
    Envy or fairness, depending on whether you are the one being taxed or not. :)
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 128,446
    edited March 2017
    Given the only polling on the subject has voters backing the NI increase, the Lords and Heseltine are yet again putting themselves against public opinion on Brexit and it was Cameron and Osborne's impossible manifesto commitment to hold income tax and NI rates and cut inheritance tax and increase funding for the NHS and social care which meant something had to give to say this is May's worst week in government is absurd
  • freetochoosefreetochoose Posts: 1,107
    glw said:

    GIN1138 said:

    I think we're in danger of going OTT. This is nowhere in the league of the tuition fees debacle - Which pretty much overnight saw the Lib-Dems going to 20% to 10% in the polls.

    It's probably not even as bad as the Pasty tax.

    PAYE employees far outnumber the self employed, so I'm not even sure that this is a vote loser.
    This in itself might not be a vote loser but Hammond's credibility is definitely harmed, we'll wait and see to what degree
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,712
    Freggles said:

    isam said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    It's a bit of a disaster, but a minor one in the overall scheme of things. I don't think a 2% increase for some well-paid people (which is what this is) is really going to be remembered amidst all the Brexit fallout.

    Someknd posted yesterday that Osborne put up NI for some last year. Is this true?
    Yes, public sector workers
    What was it before, and "after" for

    1) A self employed person earning £30k.
    2) An employed (Private sector) person earning £30k.
    3) An employed (Public sector) person earning £30k.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 85,285
    Bojabob said:

    Good post from @Richard_Tyndall OPT. As is often the case with Richard, I don't agree with all of it but his views are always very cogently argued.

    The key point I do agree with is this idea – that has been allowed to fester – that welfare should be a 'pay in, get out' regime. That's simply bonkers. My household income is very high compared to the average and, therefore, I pay a lot of tax, compared to the average. Do I think I should get all that back in services? No. Clearly I pay that as a mixture of a safety net and a general view that all civilised nations have a floor beneath which no citizen should be allowed to fall. Tax and welfare is a cost of running a country and an economy, not some sort of Christmas Savings Club run by HMRC.

    One reason why IC & NI should be merged...But given the outcry over journalists paying 60p more a week in tax, that is never going to happen.
  • ThreeQuidderThreeQuidder Posts: 6,133
    tlg86 said:

    OmNICshambles, like the LDs tuition fees pledge, will be remembered

    No it won't.

    I didn't even realise there had been such a pledge. And I pay attention to politics! It's certainly nowhere near the iconic status that the LD tuition fees pledge had.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,993
    Everybody goes back on manifesto commitments. Sometimes even if they were a good idea at the time, they are just unworkable thorugh no fault of those proposing it due to outside events. And sometimes they were never good ideas in the first place. Going back on a single one here (not that they haven't missed others, I am sure, but people are going hysterical over this one) is hardly that unusual an occurrence historically, and the important question is is there another way.

    If it is justified and necessary the breach should be maintained, and the price will be people pointing out that breach next time - but every party can also point to breaches of manifesto promises, because a certain amount is unavoidable, so its not a huge concern unless they get into the habit of breaching for no good reason - or their own incompetence is the reason - otherwise no party should produce a manifesto, if breaking a pledge means we can trust none of it.

    The Edstone was stupid for many reasons of course - the vacuous phrasing, the gimmicky nature of the stunt - but also because the idea a commitment should be set in stone so firmly is stupid, it is inflexible. Parties need to stick to their promises or else justify why they cannot, and we should judge them on how well they justify any broken promises, not merely on whether they did break a promise, because it might be for a good reason. If it is, we can be more confident they won't break the next lot of promises without a good reason.
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    No comparison really, the LDs U-turn on their tuition fees pledge meant every student would leave university owing many thousands of pounds, just as they embark on their chosen careers. The small changes to NICS is a matter of £100s for those self-employed.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,712
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Bojabob said:

    Good post from @Richard_Tyndall OPT. As is often the case with Richard, I don't agree with all of it but his views are always very cogently argued.

    The key point I do agree with is this idea – that has been allowed to fester – that welfare should be a 'pay in, get out' regime. That's simply bonkers. My household income is very high compared to the average and, therefore, I pay a lot of tax, compared to the average. Do I think I should get all that back in services? No. Clearly I pay that as a mixture of a safety net and a general view that all civilised nations have a floor beneath which no citizen should be allowed to fall. Tax and welfare is a cost of running a country and an economy, not some sort of Christmas Savings Club run by HMRC.

    One reason why IC & NI should be merged...But given the outcry over journalists paying 60p more a week in tax, that is never going to happen.
    Trump proved you don't need the media if your ideas and personality are strong enough.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 128,446
    Alistair said:

    I see that the whole Brexit causing a collapse in support for Scottish independence is gathering pace

    https://twitter.com/ReutersJamie/status/839781081964490757

    Only 49% of all voters though but we know No voters turn out from 2014. Of course Yes had a clear lead in a poll a fortnight before the last indyref
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,993
    HYUFD said:

    Alistair said:

    I see that the whole Brexit causing a collapse in support for Scottish independence is gathering pace

    https://twitter.com/ReutersJamie/status/839781081964490757

    Only 49% of all voters though but we know No voters turn out from 2014. Of course Yes had a clear lead in a poll a fortnight before the last indyref
    Did they? I thought they only had the lead in very few polls.

    Nevertheless, it seems the case that the base independent support is up a few points. And we don't know if the No voters will all turnout to the same degree they did last time (though hopefully so). The numbers are with Yes, I fear.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,712
    If Scotland votes for independence, I expect support for independence will perhaps a year later be at 60-40... which should increase over time particularly if Scotland rejoins the Eu to say 70-30.

    A Scotland within the UK remains at 49-51 forever pretty much.
  • isamisam Posts: 42,128
    edited March 2017
    Freggles said:

    isam said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    It's a bit of a disaster, but a minor one in the overall scheme of things. I don't think a 2% increase for some well-paid people (which is what this is) is really going to be remembered amidst all the Brexit fallout.

    Someknd posted yesterday that Osborne put up NI for some last year. Is this true?
    Yes, public sector workers
    Ok, so the Tories had already reneged on a, or more to the point, this, manifesto commitment. Why the outrage this year and not last?
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 39,003
    Alistair said:

    I see that the whole Brexit causing a collapse in support for Scottish independence is gathering pace

    https://twitter.com/ReutersJamie/status/839781081964490757

    Perhaps, although the polling general doesn't show much change from Referendum (apart from a blip straight after the Brexit vote).
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 66,616
    Bojabob said:

    FWIW I think the NIC thing is a storm in a teacup. It's hardly a horrific measure, perhaps amateurishly handled, but there have been much worse.

    In the hands of Blair/Brown in their glory days this would have been manna from heaven. They would have put this manifesto pledge break in their back pockets and then hammered the Tories at next GE on every single one of their tax manifesto commitments. Effectively done this could neutralise the usual 'tax bombshell' tory attack.

    But, we have Corbyn and clowns in charge, so it wont happen...
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,993
    So yes, the breach if upheld will be thrown in the Tories' faces; are we to believe a government has never had to face that before? We all want promises to be kept, where possible (and unworkable promises not to be made in the first place) and they may and should face consequences for that, but how severe should surely depend on how many times they break promises, for what reason, and what is the alternative offering?
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,856
    Pulpstar said:

    Freggles said:

    isam said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    It's a bit of a disaster, but a minor one in the overall scheme of things. I don't think a 2% increase for some well-paid people (which is what this is) is really going to be remembered amidst all the Brexit fallout.

    Someknd posted yesterday that Osborne put up NI for some last year. Is this true?
    Yes, public sector workers
    What was it before, and "after" for

    1) A self employed person earning £30k.
    2) An employed (Private sector) person earning £30k.
    3) An employed (Public sector) person earning £30k.
    My pay slips for March 2016 and April 2016:

    March: £2,818.17 - NI: £227.49
    April: £2,818.17 - NI: £257.54
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,455
    HYUFD said:

    Alistair said:

    I see that the whole Brexit causing a collapse in support for Scottish independence is gathering pace

    https://twitter.com/ReutersJamie/status/839781081964490757

    Only 49% of all voters though but we know No voters turn out from 2014. Of course Yes had a clear lead in a poll a fortnight before the last indyref
    Squeaky bum time at No 10. Carlotta will be wetting herself on how she can construe this as BAD SCOTLAND.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 128,446
    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Alistair said:

    I see that the whole Brexit causing a collapse in support for Scottish independence is gathering pace

    https://twitter.com/ReutersJamie/status/839781081964490757

    Only 49% of all voters though but we know No voters turn out from 2014. Of course Yes had a clear lead in a poll a fortnight before the last indyref
    Did they? I thought they only had the lead in very few polls.

    Nevertheless, it seems the case that the base independent support is up a few points. And we don't know if the No voters will all turnout to the same degree they did last time (though hopefully so). The numbers are with Yes, I fear.
    Yes need a clear lead to be sure of victory, they still don't have it even with the prospect of hard Brexit and most likely it will be a job offer requirement and bilateral agreements etc which May be acceptable to Scots anyway. Of course the harder the Brexit the even harder the Scexit, Scottish independence now means border controls at Berwick and customs duties on Scottish exports to the rest of the UK
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    It's probably a bit of a storm in a teacup. However, it illustrates a few things:

    1) The government is inept in checking what it had promised in the last manifesto. It's almost as if it doesn't feel that the manifesto has anything to do with it.

    2) Brexit has transformed the political terrain. It feels quaint to be talking about tax and spend.

    3) If the government can't get this policy through, it's a reminder that its small majority didn't become numerically much larger just because the opposition got more inept. Theresa May would still do well to find a way of engineering an early election, if she can.
  • glwglw Posts: 10,454
    isam said:

    Freggles said:

    isam said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    It's a bit of a disaster, but a minor one in the overall scheme of things. I don't think a 2% increase for some well-paid people (which is what this is) is really going to be remembered amidst all the Brexit fallout.

    Someknd posted yesterday that Osborne put up NI for some last year. Is this true?
    Yes, public sector workers
    Ok, so the Tories had already reneged on a, or more to the point, this, manifesto commitment. Why the outrage this year and not last?
    Remoaners wanting something to bash the government with?
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    SimonStClare said:

    No comparison really, the LDs U-turn on their tuition fees pledge meant every student would leave university owing many thousands of pounds, just as they embark on their chosen careers. The small changes to NICS is a matter of £100s for those self-employed.

    Exactly, and that is also CCHQ's spin that it is only a few journalists who are out of pocket.

    But the similarity is with the broken election pledge. A new factor is it may strain relationships between the executive and backbenches, and even the party in the country. May was supposed to be their friend, unlike the ponceyboots (am I saying it right?) Cameroons, who were seen as interlopers to be tolerated while they were winning, like Tony Blair and New Labour. This upsets that narrative.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    HYUFD said:

    Alistair said:

    I see that the whole Brexit causing a collapse in support for Scottish independence is gathering pace

    https://twitter.com/ReutersJamie/status/839781081964490757

    Only 49% of all voters though but we know No voters turn out from 2014. Of course Yes had a clear lead in a poll a fortnight before the last indyref
    I'd love to know what proportion of each cumulative percentage point of turnout Yes/No captured.

    My feeling going into the vote was that a high turnout was good for yes but a very high turnout would be good for No.

    Given the SNP got 50% on 72% turnout on the general election and Yes got 45% on 85% and the Yes to SNP vote was highly correlated I suppose you could make some assumptions.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 14,598
    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Alistair said:

    I see that the whole Brexit causing a collapse in support for Scottish independence is gathering pace

    https://twitter.com/ReutersJamie/status/839781081964490757

    Only 49% of all voters though but we know No voters turn out from 2014. Of course Yes had a clear lead in a poll a fortnight before the last indyref
    Did they? I thought they only had the lead in very few polls.

    Nevertheless, it seems the case that the base independent support is up a few points. And we don't know if the No voters will all turnout to the same degree they did last time (though hopefully so). The numbers are with Yes, I fear.
    I think Scindependance Day is a given at this point, it's just a matter of when. I presume the EU will be giving them come hither eyes in order to cock over May's Brexit negotiations.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 122,581
    A lawyer's pants were on fire in court.

    https://twitter.com/Brosner85/status/839812767435505664
  • glwglw Posts: 10,454
    edited March 2017
    rottenborough said:

    Bojabob said:

    FWIW I think the NIC thing is a storm in a teacup. It's hardly a horrific measure, perhaps amateurishly handled, but there have been much worse.

    In the hands of Blair/Brown in their glory days this would have been manna from heaven. They would have put this manifesto pledge break in their back pockets and then hammered the Tories at next GE on every single one of their tax manifesto commitments. Effectively done this could neutralise the usual 'tax bombshell' tory attack.

    But, we have Corbyn and clowns in charge, so it wont happen...
    No but you do have McDonnell talking about talking £800 billion from the wealthy, and you don't have to be that well off to just creep into the top 10%.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 66,616
    AlastairMeeks said:

    It's probably a bit of a storm in a teacup. However, it illustrates a few things:

    1) The government is inept in checking what it had promised in the last manifesto. It's almost as if it doesn't feel that the manifesto has anything to do with it.

    2) Brexit has transformed the political terrain. It feels quaint to be talking about tax and spend.

    3) If the government can't get this policy through, it's a reminder that its small majority didn't become numerically much larger just because the opposition got more inept. Theresa May would still do well to find a way of engineering an early election, if she can.

    One suspects that they may not have checked the manifesto because in their heads this is a new government, a May government, and the manifesto was Cameron.
  • isamisam Posts: 42,128
    AlastairMeeks said:

    It's probably a bit of a storm in a teacup. However, it illustrates a few things:

    1) The government is inept in checking what it had promised in the last manifesto. It's almost as if it doesn't feel that the manifesto has anything to do with it.

    2) Brexit has transformed the political terrain. It feels quaint to be talking about tax and spend.

    3) If the government can't get this policy through, it's a reminder that its small majority didn't become numerically much larger just because the opposition got more inept. Theresa May would still do well to find a way of engineering an early election, if she can.

    What say you about the NI increase on public sector workers from Osborne last year? I didn't know about that, or that there was a manifesto pledge not to do it, but it seems bizarre to hear the fuss over this years manifesto breakage, when it was already broken.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 122,581
    edited March 2017
    glw said:

    isam said:

    Freggles said:

    isam said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    It's a bit of a disaster, but a minor one in the overall scheme of things. I don't think a 2% increase for some well-paid people (which is what this is) is really going to be remembered amidst all the Brexit fallout.

    Someknd posted yesterday that Osborne put up NI for some last year. Is this true?
    Yes, public sector workers
    Ok, so the Tories had already reneged on a, or more to the point, this, manifesto commitment. Why the outrage this year and not last?
    Remoaners wanting something to bash the government with?
    The Sun, The Telegraph, The Daily Mail, John Redwood, IDS, and The Moggster are Remoaners? Who knew.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 40,054
    Bojabob said:

    Good post from @Richard_Tyndall OPT. As is often the case with Richard, I don't agree with all of it but his views are always very cogently argued.

    The key point I do agree with is this idea – that has been allowed to fester – that welfare should be a 'pay in, get out' regime. That's simply bonkers. My household income is very high compared to the average and, therefore, I pay a lot of tax, compared to the average. Do I think I should get all that back in services? No. Clearly I pay that as a mixture of a safety net and a general view that all civilised nations have a floor beneath which no citizen should be allowed to fall. Tax and welfare is a cost of running a country and an economy, not some sort of Christmas Savings Club run by HMRC.

    Yep - totally agree. As Marx nearly said about welfare and services: "From each according to his ability to pay, to each according to his needs." Of course, the key debating point is what constitutes "needs".



  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 10,080
    ThreeQuidder said:

    tlg86 said:

    OmNICshambles, like the LDs tuition fees pledge, will be remembered

    No it won't.

    I didn't even realise there had been such a pledge. And I pay attention to politics! It's certainly nowhere near the iconic status that the LD tuition fees pledge had.
    In other words 'the party I support broke a pledge and I hope that is forgotten quickly'.
  • perdixperdix Posts: 1,806
    OGH is very happy to have a stick to beat the Tories. He hopes that his LibDem friends will benefit.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 39,003
    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Alistair said:

    I see that the whole Brexit causing a collapse in support for Scottish independence is gathering pace

    https://twitter.com/ReutersJamie/status/839781081964490757

    Only 49% of all voters though but we know No voters turn out from 2014. Of course Yes had a clear lead in a poll a fortnight before the last indyref
    I'd love to know what proportion of each cumulative percentage point of turnout Yes/No captured.

    My feeling going into the vote was that a high turnout was good for yes but a very high turnout would be good for No.

    Given the SNP got 50% on 72% turnout on the general election and Yes got 45% on 85% and the Yes to SNP vote was highly correlated I suppose you could make some assumptions.
    The big surprise for me was Glasgow voting Yes. Had that city been the first to declare, I'd have been sure that Yes had won.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,712
    tlg86 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Freggles said:

    isam said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    It's a bit of a disaster, but a minor one in the overall scheme of things. I don't think a 2% increase for some well-paid people (which is what this is) is really going to be remembered amidst all the Brexit fallout.

    Someknd posted yesterday that Osborne put up NI for some last year. Is this true?
    Yes, public sector workers
    What was it before, and "after" for

    1) A self employed person earning £30k.
    2) An employed (Private sector) person earning £30k.
    3) An employed (Public sector) person earning £30k.
    My pay slips for March 2016 and April 2016:

    March: £2,818.17 - NI: £227.49
    April: £2,818.17 - NI: £257.54
    Cheers, I'll take a look at mine when I get home - we're on a similiar wage (I think)
  • PongPong Posts: 4,693
    edited March 2017
    Pulpstar said:

    Lol - the order of magnitude difference between this and the tuition fee effect is absolubtely staggering.

    This is £240 / yr at most is it not ?

    Tuition fees from zero to effectively up to around £84k over a lifetime in the last 20 years.

    Tuition fees were politically viable because the burden fell on *other* people.

    People who couldn't yet vote.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    rottenborough said:

    AlastairMeeks said:

    It's probably a bit of a storm in a teacup. However, it illustrates a few things:

    1) The government is inept in checking what it had promised in the last manifesto. It's almost as if it doesn't feel that the manifesto has anything to do with it.

    2) Brexit has transformed the political terrain. It feels quaint to be talking about tax and spend.

    3) If the government can't get this policy through, it's a reminder that its small majority didn't become numerically much larger just because the opposition got more inept. Theresa May would still do well to find a way of engineering an early election, if she can.

    One suspects that they may not have checked the manifesto because in their heads this is a new government, a May government, and the manifesto was Cameron.
    One indeed suspects that. If correct, that tells us something about David Cameron's government and something about Theresa May's government.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 66,616
    glw said:

    rottenborough said:

    Bojabob said:

    FWIW I think the NIC thing is a storm in a teacup. It's hardly a horrific measure, perhaps amateurishly handled, but there have been much worse.

    In the hands of Blair/Brown in their glory days this would have been manna from heaven. They would have put this manifesto pledge break in their back pockets and then hammered the Tories at next GE on every single one of their tax manifesto commitments. Effectively done this could neutralise the usual 'tax bombshell' tory attack.

    But, we have Corbyn and clowns in charge, so it wont happen...
    No but you do have McDonnell talking about talking £800 billion from the wealthy, and you don't have to be that well off to just creep into the top 10%.
    True, but wasn't the McD thing from a video from 2012 or some such?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 55,710
    If this is as bad as it gets they don't have much to worry about.
  • HHemmeligHHemmelig Posts: 617
    Are Mr Smithson and his Lib Dem leader Tim Farron not being a trifle hypocritical in prattling on about the government breaking manifesto pledges....certainly two words do spring to mind here..."tuition fees".
  • glwglw Posts: 10,454
    rottenborough said:

    glw said:

    rottenborough said:

    Bojabob said:

    FWIW I think the NIC thing is a storm in a teacup. It's hardly a horrific measure, perhaps amateurishly handled, but there have been much worse.

    In the hands of Blair/Brown in their glory days this would have been manna from heaven. They would have put this manifesto pledge break in their back pockets and then hammered the Tories at next GE on every single one of their tax manifesto commitments. Effectively done this could neutralise the usual 'tax bombshell' tory attack.

    But, we have Corbyn and clowns in charge, so it wont happen...
    No but you do have McDonnell talking about talking £800 billion from the wealthy, and you don't have to be that well off to just creep into the top 10%.
    True, but wasn't the McD thing from a video from 2012 or some such?
    Yes it is old, the Tories will just have to make do with "he wants to borrow £500 billion".
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @smashmorePH: Tory MP Stephen McPartland tells @daily_politics NIC raise is "not acceptable, it cannot be allowed to proceed".
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,712
    The government U-turning would be bad news for them. It was after Osborne u-turned on tax credits that back benchers knew they could push him around

    Hammond needs to stand firm, or he WILL pay the price.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 66,616
    isam said:

    AlastairMeeks said:

    It's probably a bit of a storm in a teacup. However, it illustrates a few things:

    1) The government is inept in checking what it had promised in the last manifesto. It's almost as if it doesn't feel that the manifesto has anything to do with it.

    2) Brexit has transformed the political terrain. It feels quaint to be talking about tax and spend.

    3) If the government can't get this policy through, it's a reminder that its small majority didn't become numerically much larger just because the opposition got more inept. Theresa May would still do well to find a way of engineering an early election, if she can.

    What say you about the NI increase on public sector workers from Osborne last year? I didn't know about that, or that there was a manifesto pledge not to do it, but it seems bizarre to hear the fuss over this years manifesto breakage, when it was already broken.
    Hold on, wasn't the NI thing last year about SERPS or one of the other pension thingies?
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,822
    edited March 2017
    isam said:

    Someone posted yesterday that Osborne put up NI for some last year. Is this true?

    It's not really true. What he did was end the (partial) contracting-out of NI for public sector workers, marginally reducing the massively unfair advantage which public-sector workers have over almost everyone else in their pension arrangements.

    Unsurprisingly, although as you'd expect the unions were indignant about it, it was so obviously not an unfair change that the indignation didn't get much publicity, and it would be hard to argue that it was a breach of the manifesto pledge.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/george-osborne-national-insurance-wage-cuts-a6956731.html
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,938
    edited March 2017
    perdix said:

    OGH is very happy to have a stick to beat the Tories. He hopes that his LibDem friends will benefit.

    I thought OGH more of less washed his hands of the Lib-Dems some time ago? :open_mouth:
  • glwglw Posts: 10,454
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    glw said:

    isam said:

    Freggles said:

    isam said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    It's a bit of a disaster, but a minor one in the overall scheme of things. I don't think a 2% increase for some well-paid people (which is what this is) is really going to be remembered amidst all the Brexit fallout.

    Someknd posted yesterday that Osborne put up NI for some last year. Is this true?
    Yes, public sector workers
    Ok, so the Tories had already reneged on a, or more to the point, this, manifesto commitment. Why the outrage this year and not last?
    Remoaners wanting something to bash the government with?
    The Sun, The Telegraph, The Daily Mail, John Redwood, IDS, and The Moggster are Remoaners? Who knew.
    I'm not saying everybody who is complaining is a Remoaner. But there do seem to be a fair number of commentators who in other circumstances would normally applaud a modest and highly progressive tax rise.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 66,616
    Dominic Raab not happy. Warning a seperate bill will allow NI to be looked at "in the round".
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Pulpstar said:

    The government U-turning would be bad news for them. It was after Osborne u-turned on tax credits that back benchers knew they could push him around

    Hammond needs to stand firm, or he WILL pay the price.

    If he doesn't have the numbers to back his proposal (and my reading is that he doesn't), he will need to bend - or crash.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 66,616
    glw said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    glw said:

    isam said:

    Freggles said:

    isam said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    It's a bit of a disaster, but a minor one in the overall scheme of things. I don't think a 2% increase for some well-paid people (which is what this is) is really going to be remembered amidst all the Brexit fallout.

    Someknd posted yesterday that Osborne put up NI for some last year. Is this true?
    Yes, public sector workers
    Ok, so the Tories had already reneged on a, or more to the point, this, manifesto commitment. Why the outrage this year and not last?
    Remoaners wanting something to bash the government with?
    The Sun, The Telegraph, The Daily Mail, John Redwood, IDS, and The Moggster are Remoaners? Who knew.
    I'm not saying everybody who is complaining is a Remoaner. But there do seem to be a fair number of commentators who in other circumstances would normally applaud a modest and highly progressive tax rise.
    You probably need to insert the word "self-employed" before "commentators".

    Meanwhile Janet Dailey is on the warpath about the digital tax changes and quarterly inputs.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    AlastairMeeks said:

    If he doesn't have the numbers to back his proposal (and my reading is that he doesn't), he will need to bend - or crash.

    https://twitter.com/jgforsyth/status/839815653238456322
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 122,581
    https://twitter.com/AndyPRG/status/839749026576740353
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,712
    AlastairMeeks said:

    Pulpstar said:

    The government U-turning would be bad news for them. It was after Osborne u-turned on tax credits that back benchers knew they could push him around

    Hammond needs to stand firm, or he WILL pay the price.

    If he doesn't have the numbers to back his proposal (and my reading is that he doesn't), he will need to bend - or crash.
    If he bends on this then I can't see him lasting that long in post - or if he does doing anything meaningful to tax & spend. He will be hamstrung and seen as weak, weak, weak.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    edited March 2017
    Sean_F said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Alistair said:

    I see that the whole Brexit causing a collapse in support for Scottish independence is gathering pace

    https://twitter.com/ReutersJamie/status/839781081964490757

    Only 49% of all voters though but we know No voters turn out from 2014. Of course Yes had a clear lead in a poll a fortnight before the last indyref
    I'd love to know what proportion of each cumulative percentage point of turnout Yes/No captured.

    My feeling going into the vote was that a high turnout was good for yes but a very high turnout would be good for No.

    Given the SNP got 50% on 72% turnout on the general election and Yes got 45% on 85% and the Yes to SNP vote was highly correlated I suppose you could make some assumptions.
    The big surprise for me was Glasgow voting Yes. Had that city been the first to declare, I'd have been sure that Yes had won.
    Given the clear correlation between deprivation and yes vote in the polling I wasn't surprised, but the low Glasgow turnout did surprise and (obviously) disappoint me.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,938
    edited March 2017
    Scott_P said:

    AlastairMeeks said:

    If he doesn't have the numbers to back his proposal (and my reading is that he doesn't), he will need to bend - or crash.

    https://twitter.com/jgforsyth/status/839815653238456322
    What on Earth makes him think that? Nobody is "unsackable" except maybe HMQ...
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,822
    edited March 2017
    AlastairMeeks said:

    If he doesn't have the numbers to back his proposal (and my reading is that he doesn't), he will need to bend - or crash.

    Yes, it is looking that way.

    Some of the backbench fuss seems to be coming from hardline Brexiteers, who might be using it as a means of weakening the most senior softer-Brexit member of the government.
  • glwglw Posts: 10,454
    rottenborough said:

    You probably need to insert the word "self-employed" before "commentators".

    Meanwhile Janet Dailey is on the warpath about the digital tax changes and quarterly inputs.

    I somewhat agree with Daley. There's also a bit of a divide between HRMC and the gov.uk people over systems. If we are going to file quarterly returns the systems had better be top notch.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,712
    rottenborough said:

    Dominic Raab not happy. Warning a seperate bill will allow NI to be looked at "in the round".

    Well quite. Lets look at the 25% charge put on the real "middle britain" of PAYE workers.
  • Hertsmere_PubgoerHertsmere_Pubgoer Posts: 3,476
    "One thing’s for sure Cameron/Osborne would not have made this mistake."

    OGH, you are TSE and I claim a reduced PB membership fee.
    :-)
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 7,808
    edited March 2017
    Not only is the amount involved peanuts but surely it's the case that nobody is going to pay a penny more until January 2019?

    ie The change comes in from April 2018 - tax and NI for 2018/19 will be payable in two instalments - in January 2019 and July 2019 - based on estimated income (ie prior year) - and it's then adjusted to correct figure in January 2020.
  • Animal_pbAnimal_pb Posts: 608
    AlastairMeeks said:

    rottenborough said:

    AlastairMeeks said:

    It's probably a bit of a storm in a teacup. However, it illustrates a few things:

    1) The government is inept in checking what it had promised in the last manifesto. It's almost as if it doesn't feel that the manifesto has anything to do with it.

    2) Brexit has transformed the political terrain. It feels quaint to be talking about tax and spend.

    3) If the government can't get this policy through, it's a reminder that its small majority didn't become numerically much larger just because the opposition got more inept. Theresa May would still do well to find a way of engineering an early election, if she can.

    One suspects that they may not have checked the manifesto because in their heads this is a new government, a May government, and the manifesto was Cameron.
    One indeed suspects that. If correct, that tells us something about David Cameron's government and something about Theresa May's government.
    The other wrinkle we need to contemplate is the different relationship between No 10 & 11. Cameron and Osborne were a double act; May and Hammond are nowhere near as close. Another fumble like this could easily see Disco Phil jettisoned in favour of another Amber-esque acolyte.

    Are there any markets up on next Chancellor right now?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 128,446
    edited March 2017
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    https://twitter.com/AndyPRG/status/839749026576740353

    The press have totally misjudged this because of self enjoyed journos, 57% back the NI rise according to Sky
  • RazedabodeRazedabode Posts: 3,116
    All seems a bit over the top reaction wise.

    How many omnishambles budgets did boy George manage to engineer?

    Likewise, regarding the polling for independence - good on them. The SNP would have to front up to some pretty harsh realities (which no doubt will also be blamed on Westminster.
  • PeterMannionPeterMannion Posts: 712
    I suspect the idea was that this was a promise that could be ditched and blamed on having to go into another coalition government (not that the Lib Dems got away with that argument).

    Winning an overall majority unexpectedly failed to disarm some of their own booby traps...
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    HYUFD said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    https://twitter.com/AndyPRG/status/839749026576740353

    The press have totally misjudged this because of self enjoyed journos, 57% back the NI rise according to Sky
    If the 43 percent are all in Tory marginals...
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 122,581
    ‪The UK's top pension expert speaks. ‬

    https://twitter.com/stevewebb1/status/839816522264625152
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,856
    Pulpstar said:

    tlg86 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Freggles said:

    isam said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    It's a bit of a disaster, but a minor one in the overall scheme of things. I don't think a 2% increase for some well-paid people (which is what this is) is really going to be remembered amidst all the Brexit fallout.

    Someknd posted yesterday that Osborne put up NI for some last year. Is this true?
    Yes, public sector workers
    What was it before, and "after" for

    1) A self employed person earning £30k.
    2) An employed (Private sector) person earning £30k.
    3) An employed (Public sector) person earning £30k.
    My pay slips for March 2016 and April 2016:

    March: £2,818.17 - NI: £227.49
    April: £2,818.17 - NI: £257.54
    Cheers, I'll take a look at mine when I get home - we're on a similiar wage (I think)
    To be honest I'd completely forgotten about this until someone mentioned it on here last night. Since I started work in 2009 quite a lot has changed - the pensions contributions have been going up while the tax free allowance has also been going up. The gains and losses have pretty much cancelled each other out.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,712
    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    https://twitter.com/AndyPRG/status/839749026576740353

    The press have totally misjudged this because of self enjoyed journos, 57% back the NI rise according to Sky
    If the 43 percent are all in Tory marginals...
    Olney might be able to hold Richmond because of this, and that will be about it.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 66,616
    Animal_pb said:

    AlastairMeeks said:

    rottenborough said:

    AlastairMeeks said:

    It's probably a bit of a storm in a teacup. However, it illustrates a few things:

    1) The government is inept in checking what it had promised in the last manifesto. It's almost as if it doesn't feel that the manifesto has anything to do with it.

    2) Brexit has transformed the political terrain. It feels quaint to be talking about tax and spend.

    3) If the government can't get this policy through, it's a reminder that its small majority didn't become numerically much larger just because the opposition got more inept. Theresa May would still do well to find a way of engineering an early election, if she can.

    One suspects that they may not have checked the manifesto because in their heads this is a new government, a May government, and the manifesto was Cameron.
    One indeed suspects that. If correct, that tells us something about David Cameron's government and something about Theresa May's government.
    The other wrinkle we need to contemplate is the different relationship between No 10 & 11. Cameron and Osborne were a double act; May and Hammond are nowhere near as close. Another fumble like this could easily see Disco Phil jettisoned in favour of another Amber-esque acolyte.

    Are there any markets up on next Chancellor right now?
    BF have a first cabinet member to leave market but it is totally moribund.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,703
    Mr. Mannion, the biggest of those was the referendum promise.
  • old_labourold_labour Posts: 3,238
    Sky interviewing someone from Resolution Foundation- 96% of changes to NICs will be paid by wealthiest households.
This discussion has been closed.