politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Osborne – the Volkswagen of British politics – having take
Comments
-
Mr. Pulpstar, will you be blogging more when the contest (in the US) starts kicking off properly?
'twas a short but interesting piece.
Mr. Doethur, I suspect the single moment at university I got most credit with others was when I spoke first during some group work to ask if anyone knew what 'discursive' meant [it was a critical word in the task we had]. Nobody had a clue, and seemed relieved someone else had admitted ignorance first.
Just pretending you understand something can be very tempting, but it leads you into foolish dead ends.
Like believing Caesar was superior to Hannibal.0 -
Moses..entirely agree re the smoking and drinking when they are on benefits..why should I and many others pay for that ..0
-
Dave prefers the COOPeration!Casino_Royale said:
Every Lidl helps.JackW said:
First Morrisons and now Iceland. Is Dave on a supermarket sweep ??Casino_Royale said:Off topic, Cameron off to Iceland ....
Clearly stocking up on Artic Roll for Christmas lunch at Chequers.0 -
As is often the case @TSE is talking a load of old b*llocks and frankly much ado about nothing.TheScreamingEagles said:
Every time you put your foot down it felt like a beautiful lady was putting her hands down your pants and having a good old rummage.RobD said:
Was it a Type 770?TheScreamingEagles said:On topic the best vehicle I've ever owned/driven was part of the VW group.
0 -
Just read Hansard on last night's vote in the Lords on timing of voter registration - which will have a large impact on new boundaries and therefore on the result of the 2020 election.
I quote:
"5.28 pm
Division on Lord Kennedy’s Amendment
Contents 267; Not-Contents 257.
Lord Kennedy’s Amendment agreed.
As a result of a technical problem, the voting list was unavailable for Division No. 1, and will be published online as soon as it is available.
5.45 pm
Division on Lord Tyler’s Motion, as amended.
Contents 246; Not-Contents 257.
Lord Tyler’s Motion, as amended, disagreed.
As a result of a technical problem, the voting list was unavailable for Division No 2, and will be published online as soon as it is available. "
This is most peculiar. There are only 17 minutes between the two divisions. In fact the 2nd division followed immediately after the first. Yet 19 names disappeared off the Content list. They had just voted for the amendment to made to the original motion but failed to vote for it immediately after. But all the Non-Contents voted. And now there is a technical problem.
If the technical problem is a serious miscount, how embarrassing will that be? It obviously isn't a TECHNICAL problem. What technical problem would prevent a list of names being printed in Hansard. A faulty keyboard?.. No - there is something peculiar here. Or am I being paranoid?
0 -
They'll pay the price for being exposed first too.ydoethur said:
I think that's only going to be the start, and it will surely finish with VW either being wound up or asset-stripped and sold off. Which is rather sad in many ways - I've done 100,000 miles in Skodas in the last ten years and they are superb cars.TheScreamingEagles said:@PickardJE: Volkswagen posts a third-quarter loss of E3.5 bn (or E1.6bn after-tax loss)
That being said, the wound is entirely self-inflicted so they deserve no actual sympathy.0 -
@MichaelPDeacon @JamesManning It begs the question: "Why doesn't he just go and JOIN THE TORIES?"TheScreamingEagles said:Corbyn's first betrayal. Caught with a copy of The Sun. Bootle is now a Tory target.
@MichaelPDeacon: The first betrayal. Via @JamesManning https://t.co/3QjdMf85D4
titter0 -
Yes indeed.... but all you were doing was asphyxiating first born with your emissions rather than using the traditional pitchfork.TheScreamingEagles said:On topic the best vehicle I've ever owned/driven was part of the VW group.
;-)
0 -
Those making the same tired arguments for remaining in the EU refuse to take on board any criticism of their arguments. The 3 million jobs lie has been repeatedly discredited yet still gets used time and time again. It was only the other day when the author of the report where the lie originated from confronted Will Straw and demanded he stop using it.CD13 said:
The EU referendum already has the feel of deja vu. The PM and most of the media pretending to get a good deal for the UK while hiding the real facts. Just like forty years ago, when I took a great deal of interest.
This time I'm bored. It worked once so they're repeating the trick. And assuming the young are gullible.0 -
'Cameron is either incrediblly dishonest or has a poor grasp of Norway's relationship with the EU'
He is just spinning the same Foreign Office line that Richard N posts on here every week. It is indeed utterly disingenuous.
The FO and their fellow travellers in the political parties and elsewhere in the bureaucracy are simply terrified of no longer being, as they see it, 'at the top table' i.e. attending summits and issuing communiques and looking terribly important. All their other arguments are a smokescreen.
Cameron is 100% in this group I'm afraid. His mind on the EU is completely closed.0 -
David Cameron is well within his rights to point out that Norwegian politicians consider Norway's relations with the EU have downsides. If Leavers are going to be so brittle about every inconvenient argument, we will run out of Valium in the next two years.0
-
Definitely peculiarly. Is the Tory Chief Whip in the Lords Francis Urquhart?Barnesian said:Just read Hansard on last night's vote in the Lords on timing of voter registration - which will have a large impact on new boundaries and therefore on the result of the 2020 election.
I quote:
"5.28 pm
Division on Lord Kennedy’s Amendment
Contents 267; Not-Contents 257.
Lord Kennedy’s Amendment agreed.
As a result of a technical problem, the voting list was unavailable for Division No. 1, and will be published online as soon as it is available.
5.45 pm
Division on Lord Tyler’s Motion, as amended.
Contents 246; Not-Contents 257.
Lord Tyler’s Motion, as amended, disagreed.
As a result of a technical problem, the voting list was unavailable for Division No 2, and will be published online as soon as it is available. "
This is most peculiar. There are only 17 minutes between the two divisions. In fact the 2nd division followed immediately after the first. Yet 19 names disappeared off the Content list. They had just voted for the amendment to made to the original motion but failed to vote for it immediately after. But all the Non-Contents voted. And now there is a technical problem.
If the technical problem is a serious miscount, how embarrassing will that be? It obviously isn't a TECHNICAL problem. What technical problem would prevent a list of names being printed in Hansard. A faulty keyboard?.. No - there is something peculiar here. Or am I being paranoid?
0 -
Mr. Runnymede, alas, I agree.
Never bought the view that Cameron would campaign for anything other than In.0 -
Back to vouchers. And for leftie pensioners, too - everybody knows they never grafted, not one day in their lives.richardDodd said:Moses..entirely agree re the smoking and drinking when they are on benefits..why should I and many others pay for that ..
If Maggie was still with us she'd have had JC and all his friends hanged high, hanged higher and hanged once again, just to be sure!
0 -
Leavers are unhappy that he's making arguments for the EU and against the EEA before he's even gone to the EU with his formal negotiation demands, yet alone got a deal.antifrank said:David Cameron is well within his rights to point out that Norwegian politicians consider Norway's relations with the EU have downsides. If Leavers are going to be so brittle about every inconvenient argument, we will run out of Valium in the next two years.
What happened to 'ruling nothing out'?
He seems to be ruling quite a bit out.0 -
In fairness to Thatcher, although she supported the death penalty, I've not heard of her calling for the execution of any opposition politicians - not even of Arthur Scargill, whom she publicly accused of high treason and attempted insurrection. Corbyn's magazine, on the other hand...Innocent_Abroad said:
If Maggie was still with us she'd have had JC and all his friends hanged high, hanged higher and hanged once again, just to be sure!0 -
It is hard to imagine just how frustrated the Norwegian counterparts of our FO and senior politicians must be.
Given their predilection for issuing lectures to the rest of the world on various topics, being unable to join in the pious intonations and dreary debates in the EU must be heart rending.
0 -
Mr. Royale, not only that, if you enter negotiation making plain you want to be In, where's the bargaining power for the UK or the incentive for Brussels to give anything away?
Even if I were an Inner, I'd be annoyed because his stance now weakens the deal he'll get and make it a little harder for In to win [though I still expect it to do so comfortably].0 -
Correct.runnymede said:'Cameron is either incrediblly dishonest or has a poor grasp of Norway's relationship with the EU'
He is just spinning the same Foreign Office line that Richard N posts on here every week. It is indeed utterly disingenuous.
The FO and their fellow travellers in the political parties and elsewhere in the bureaucracy are simply terrified of no longer being, as they see it, 'at the top table' i.e. attending summits and issuing communiques and looking terribly important. All their other arguments are a smokescreen.
Cameron is 100% in this group I'm afraid. His mind on the EU is completely closed.
The way I see it the tories are split 50/50 and although the labour party is pro EU I'm not convinced most of its voters are. I foresee an opportunity for labour voters to give Cameron a bloody nose and boot him out of office, which is effectively what they'll be doing.
0 -
Yeah easy response and completely avoids all the points made. No dictatorship about it, Why should they take welfare and then set light to it. As I said more than happy to help anyone and I do in many different ways at help centres soup runs etc but there are many just taking the Mickey.Innocent_Abroad said:
If only you were the UK's dictator, why, it would be paradise on earth.Moses_ said:
I mentioned a few days ago visitors to food banks could still light up before and afterwards. They had money to spend on ciggies so WTF were they at a food bank collecting free food.SquareRoot said:foxinsoxuk said:Unusually good piece on Radio Leicester this morning.
21 000 people in Leics could be lifted out of poverty by giving up smoking. Vox pops from people buying ciggies on the Saffron Lane estate often spending £70-100 per week on an early death.
Don't know if its true but I was told that cigs are so expensive now (a packet of B and H I am told is now circa TEN POUNDS ) that the fag co's are introducing smaller size packs...
I was a 20+ a day smoker and I save 200 a month plus since I gave up. Worst life decision I ever made was to take that first puff.
You only had to watch programmes like Benefits St and Skint (two different parts of the country) to see everyone smoking and drinking from cans of beer. I am not stereotyping here it was there right in front of you and it was constant all day long The issue is I could never afford to smoke at the prices as they were even then which was close to 9 quid a pack. ( not that I would even want to)
My point is They were basically burning mine and many others hard earned cash. Poverty in some households is not being able to afford a lighter to ignite your next ciggie. Despite the bleating of the left. My view is you are caught smoking then benefits are cut and no food banks to bale you out.
More than happy to help and give a leg up to anyone genuine down on their luck and needing welfare to get by while they get back on track. . However, If you can afford to smoke and drink you don't need the help of those of all of the rest of us grafting day in and day out to support your life style choice while they sit around and bemoan their lot.
You pay if you want to but I am not here to support the lifestyles of white Dee and co.0 -
Advocating Prime Ministerial purdah seems a bit extreme. He's entitled to his views. He's never made any secret of his default preference for staying in the EU.Casino_Royale said:
Leavers are unhappy that he's making arguments for the EU and against the EEA before he's even gone to the EU with his formal negotiation demands, yet alone got a deal.antifrank said:David Cameron is well within his rights to point out that Norwegian politicians consider Norway's relations with the EU have downsides. If Leavers are going to be so brittle about every inconvenient argument, we will run out of Valium in the next two years.
What happened to 'ruling nothing out'?
He seems to be ruling quite a bit out.
At what points do you accept that the Prime Minister could properly argue for the benefits of EU membership? Or is it the case that you just don't like him doing this, full stop?0 -
I am sure Dave will mention that only 15% of Norwegians want to join the EU...antifrank said:David Cameron is well within his rights to point out that Norwegian politicians consider Norway's relations with the EU have downsides. If Leavers are going to be so brittle about every inconvenient argument, we will run out of Valium in the next two years.
0 -
That can cut both ways Mr Dancer. If he can't get a deal that's satisfactory, when he clearly desperately wants to, and changes his mind in order to recommend leave, how damaging would that be for the EU? Every Eurosceptic party in Europe would immediately run with the line, 'Even the EU's friends say that it's so bad that their country had to leave!'Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Royale, not only that, if you enter negotiation making plain you want to be In, where's the bargaining power for the UK or the incentive for Brussels to give anything away?
Even if I were an Inner, I'd be annoyed because his stance now weakens the deal he'll get and make it a little harder for In to win [though I still expect it to do so comfortably].
On the whole I think Cameron knows full well he's not going to get much anyway, so it doesn't matter much what stance he takes. But with him hanging pro-EU flags out of every porthole to try and sweeten the negotiations, the EU leaders should be wary of disappointing him.0 -
Others are welcome to make their own arguments. The wanton outbreaks of hysteria from the hardline BOOers every time the Prime Minister expresses his own views on the EU do them no credit at all.MP_SE said:
I am sure Dave will mention that only 15% of Norwegians want to join the EU...antifrank said:David Cameron is well within his rights to point out that Norwegian politicians consider Norway's relations with the EU have downsides. If Leavers are going to be so brittle about every inconvenient argument, we will run out of Valium in the next two years.
Personally, I can't see a huge amount of relevance to the UK of Norway's position either way. Its circumstances are too different from our own.0 -
Mr Moses,
I know the past is a foreign country, but looking back to the fifties and life on a council estate with five siblings, there was a major factor factor in having enough food. We managed on a labourer's wage plus my mother doing cleaning jobs because they hardly ever drank alcohol.
There were families in real poverty because the father (and there were fathers then) drank heavily. We wore hand-me-downs and didn't take holidays but we generally ate well.
They do things differently now; the poverty is just as real but it has different causes. Some families were just as disorganised but they lacked a safety net.
The diagnosis is easy but the cure is much more difficult. When you live from hand-to-mouth, cigarettes and alcohol seem more attractive in the short term. People are people.
That is one reason that religious organisations are useful - they don't judge, or rather, they try not to.
Left wingers assume people are potentially angels thwarted by the baby-eaters. The cure ... kill the baby-eaters. For the religious, all people are potentially angels but all are sinners in the meantime.
That Ben Carson, I had him in the back of my taxi once ...
0 -
I hold no brief for Osborne, but if the Company hasn't paid CT, it's because the Company hasn't made a profit over that period.redcliffe62 said:If UK collected more Corporation Tax the need to cut welfare would lessen.
Sadly companies like Osborne and Little with a turnover since 2008 of 200m have creatively manage to pay nothing, ZERO, actually claiming a Corporation Tax refund. The Baronet running it gets about 600k a year.
If you wonder why the books of the country do not balance start with the Chancellor and his family and work your way down.
It IS legal. Fair enough. Whether it should be is a moot point.
Imagine if companies paid a fairer share? Even a 0.5% revenue tax would turn it around.
If I was Labour I would promote this farce in the MSM at every opportunity and Osborne would not even be a Dinky car toy let alone a VW.0 -
Do the soup centres impose the rules you want to? And if not, why do you go on volunteering for them?Moses_ said:
Yeah easy response and completely avoids all the points made. No dictatorship about it, Why should they take welfare and then set light to it. As I said more than happy to help anyone and I do in many different ways at help centres soup runs etc but there are many just taking the Mickey.Innocent_Abroad said:
If only you were the UK's dictator, why, it would be paradise on earth.Moses_ said:
I mentioned a few days ago visitors to food banks could still light up before and afterwards. They had money to spend on ciggies so WTF were they at a food bank collecting free food.SquareRoot said:foxinsoxuk said:Unusually good piece on Radio Leicester this morning.
21 000 people in Leics could be lifted out of poverty by giving up smoking. Vox pops from people buying ciggies on the Saffron Lane estate often spending £70-100 per week on an early death.
Don't know if its true but I was told that cigs are so expensive now (a packet of B and H I am told is now circa TEN POUNDS ) that the fag co's are introducing smaller size packs...
I was a 20+ a day smoker and I save 200 a month plus since I gave up. Worst life decision I ever made was to take that first puff.
You only had to watch programmes like Benefits St and Skint (two different parts of the country) to see everyone smoking and drinking from cans of beer. I am not stereotyping here it was there right in front of you and it was constant all day long The issue is I could never afford to smoke at the prices as they were even then which was close to 9 quid a pack. ( not that I would even want to)
My point is They were basically burning mine and many others hard earned cash. Poverty in some households is not being able to afford a lighter to ignite your next ciggie. Despite the bleating of the left. My view is you are caught smoking then benefits are cut and no food banks to bale you out.
More than happy to help and give a leg up to anyone genuine down on their luck and needing welfare to get by while they get back on track. . However, If you can afford to smoke and drink you don't need the help of those of all of the rest of us grafting day in and day out to support your life style choice while they sit around and bemoan their lot.
You pay if you want to but I am not here to support the lifestyles of white Dee and co.
0 -
We will more than likely be offered something similar what we currently have. It will be rebranded associate membership.ydoethur said:
That can cut both ways Mr Dancer. If he can't get a deal that's satisfactory, when he clearly desperately wants to, and changes his mind in order to recommend leave, how damaging would that be for the EU? Every Eurosceptic party in Europe would immediately run with the line, 'Even the EU's friends say that it's so bad that their country had to leave!'Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Royale, not only that, if you enter negotiation making plain you want to be In, where's the bargaining power for the UK or the incentive for Brussels to give anything away?
Even if I were an Inner, I'd be annoyed because his stance now weakens the deal he'll get and make it a little harder for In to win [though I still expect it to do so comfortably].
On the whole I think Cameron knows full well he's not going to get much anyway, so it doesn't matter much what stance he takes. But with him hanging pro-EU flags out of every porthole to try and sweeten the negotiations, the EU leaders should be wary of disappointing him.0 -
Mr. Doethur, I'd be flabbergasted if Cameron went for Out.0
-
It was ever thus with the Tories, they live to line theirs and their chums pockets. For sure they are skillful at that.redcliffe62 said:If UK collected more Corporation Tax the need to cut welfare would lessen.
Sadly companies like Osborne and Little with a turnover since 2008 of 200m have creatively manage to pay nothing, ZERO, actually claiming a Corporation Tax refund. The Baronet running it gets about 600k a year.
If you wonder why the books of the country do not balance start with the Chancellor and his family and work your way down.
It IS legal. Fair enough. Whether it should be is a moot point.
Imagine if companies paid a fairer share? Even a 0.5% revenue tax would turn it around.
If I was Labour I would promote this farce in the MSM at every opportunity and Osborne would not even be a Dinky car toy let alone a VW.0 -
I don't think he can. Remember it's just the last in a long string of incompetences which he was fortunate to get away with. Yesrterday he looked like a rabbit caught in headlights and the humiliation of watching Boris speak up for him...
OT I heard Tim Farron speak from Lesbos. Very impressive. Those looking for a left of centre home slightly less dishevelled than Corbyn's Labour Party should take note0 -
'if you enter negotiation making plain you want to be In, where's the bargaining power for the UK or the incentive for Brussels to give anything away'
Yes but you are assuming he actually wants to achieve something substantial. He doesn't. The FO view has already been published some years ago, in a laughably complacent and dishonest document that concluded that the status quo was fine. That remains their position.
The 'renegotiation' process is being handled by essentially the same set of people who put forward that view. All that is wanted here is some cosmetic fluff to disguise the continuation of the current relationship.
They think they are being terribly clever. We shall see whether that is the case.0 -
It's Cameron's disingenuous posturing that irks me, he is going through the pathetic charade of renegotiation and keeping options open when in reality he wants IN at any price.antifrank said:
Others are welcome to make their own arguments. The wanton outbreaks of hysteria from the hardline BOOers every time the Prime Minister expresses his own views on the EU do them no credit at all.MP_SE said:
I am sure Dave will mention that only 15% of Norwegians want to join the EU...antifrank said:David Cameron is well within his rights to point out that Norwegian politicians consider Norway's relations with the EU have downsides. If Leavers are going to be so brittle about every inconvenient argument, we will run out of Valium in the next two years.
Personally, I can't see a huge amount of relevance to the UK of Norway's position either way. Its circumstances are too different from our own.
I've heard labour politicians say they'll vote IN regardless and while I disagree I respect that stance. Cameron is trying to take us for fools and it will backfire.
0 -
I have always been under the impression that soup was food..cigs and booze are not..and soup can be made very cheaply..0
-
Ha! so having avoided the points made you then swerve the argument onto pensioners. Who the hell said anything about pensioners! Seriously? I mean seriously?Innocent_Abroad said:
Back to vouchers. And for leftie pensioners, too - everybody knows they never grafted, not one day in their lives.richardDodd said:Moses..entirely agree re the smoking and drinking when they are on benefits..why should I and many others pay for that ..
If Maggie was still with us she'd have had JC and all his friends hanged high, hanged higher and hanged once again, just to be sure!
Pensioners have no place in this argument other than the fact many are still paying tax still which then in part is distributed to these claimants so that's your connection if you even really desperately want one. You are though a typical leftie. You can't address the point so cloud the argument, muddy the waters and then call the person a dictator.
You really are a numpty and not worth debating with.
0 -
DavidL said:
Someone with the moniker of Casino_Royale is complaining about someone else's Bond obsession?Casino_Royale said:FPT - TSE has already seen Spectre four times in the last day?!
Does he have a job? Or does he just not require sleep, like Toby Stephens in Die Another Day?
Seriously?
Not at all. I saw (you guessed it) Casino Royale at the cinema four times too, but that was over a timeframe of three weeks.DavidL said:
Someone with the moniker of Casino_Royale is complaining about someone else's Bond obsession?Casino_Royale said:FPT - TSE has already seen Spectre four times in the last day?!
Does he have a job? Or does he just not require sleep, like Toby Stephens in Die Another Day?
Seriously?
I genuinely think I couldn't do it inside 24 hours.0 -
Well, I feel joy. I only began the discussion to lead you into personal abuse.Moses_ said:
Ha! so having avoided the points made you then swerve the argument onto pensioners. Who the hell said anything about pensioners! Seriously? I mean seriously?Innocent_Abroad said:
Back to vouchers. And for leftie pensioners, too - everybody knows they never grafted, not one day in their lives.richardDodd said:Moses..entirely agree re the smoking and drinking when they are on benefits..why should I and many others pay for that ..
If Maggie was still with us she'd have had JC and all his friends hanged high, hanged higher and hanged once again, just to be sure!
Pensioners have no place in this argument other than the fact many are still paying tax still which then in part is distributed to these claimants so that's your connection if you even really desperately want one. You are though a typical leftie. You can't address the point so cloud the argument, muddy the waters and then call the person a dictator.
You really are a numpty and not worth debating with.
0 -
If you can't do it four times inside 24 hours then there are some tablets that could help you.Casino_Royale said:DavidL said:
Someone with the moniker of Casino_Royale is complaining about someone else's Bond obsession?Casino_Royale said:FPT - TSE has already seen Spectre four times in the last day?!
Does he have a job? Or does he just not require sleep, like Toby Stephens in Die Another Day?
Seriously?
Not at all. I saw (you guessed it) Casino Royale at the cinema four times too, but that was over a timeframe of three weeks.DavidL said:
Someone with the moniker of Casino_Royale is complaining about someone else's Bond obsession?Casino_Royale said:FPT - TSE has already seen Spectre four times in the last day?!
Does he have a job? Or does he just not require sleep, like Toby Stephens in Die Another Day?
Seriously?
I genuinely think I couldn't do it inside 24 hours.
I'm fortunate that I live and work near two fine cinemas, one of them being a Cineworld0 -
Yes, Javid being the obvious one.antifrank said:
That depends who they selected instead. The Conservatives have quite a few entirely viable candidates.DavidL said:
The Tory membership not selecting Osborne would be at least as ridiculous as the Labour party rejecting Healey for Foot. I mean its possible but it would come with a terrible price.Casino_Royale said:
Your third sentence is the problem for GO.antifrank said:We're a few years off from the change of Conservative leadership: two at a minimum. So short term ups and downs aren't that important. George Osborne's problems with tax credits wouldn't matter at all if they didn't reinforce the previously held view of him.
Meanwhile, he continues to have a huge support base in the Parliamentary party and in all likelihood David Cameron will discreetly try to assist his friend by timing his own resignation for the most helpful moment. If George Osborne wants the job, he is almost certainly going to be in the last two. The market has overreacted.
If he wants it, he will probably make the last two. But he has to win the membership vote too and, of that, I'm not so sure.
I'm still not at all sure that George Osborne will ultimately run. If he can carry on doing what he's doing now, he'd probably prefer to see a protege in Number 10. So look closely at his political friends. The successor to David Cameron may be one of those.
Osborne has serious flaws as a frontman. He really struggles to connect.
Also I don't think he's ever got over his obsession with The Project and takes too many of his lessons from New Labour.
We are beyond that now and as we move into the 2020s we need a fresh vision of Conservatism.0 -
Morning all,Casino_Royale said:
Yes, Javid being the obvious one.antifrank said:
That depends who they selected instead. The Conservatives have quite a few entirely viable candidates.DavidL said:
The Tory membership not selecting Osborne would be at least as ridiculous as the Labour party rejecting Healey for Foot. I mean its possible but it would come with a terrible price.Casino_Royale said:
Your third sentence is the problem for GO.antifrank said:We're a few years off from the change of Conservative leadership: two at a minimum. So short term ups and downs aren't that important. George Osborne's problems with tax credits wouldn't matter at all if they didn't reinforce the previously held view of him.
Meanwhile, he continues to have a huge support base in the Parliamentary party and in all likelihood David Cameron will discreetly try to assist his friend by timing his own resignation for the most helpful moment. If George Osborne wants the job, he is almost certainly going to be in the last two. The market has overreacted.
If he wants it, he will probably make the last two. But he has to win the membership vote too and, of that, I'm not so sure.
I'm still not at all sure that George Osborne will ultimately run. If he can carry on doing what he's doing now, he'd probably prefer to see a protege in Number 10. So look closely at his political friends. The successor to David Cameron may be one of those.
Osborne has serious flaws as a frontman. He really struggles to connect.
Also I don't think he's ever got over his obsession with The Project and takes too many of his lessons from New Labour.
We are beyond that now and as we move into the 2020s we need a fresh vision of Conservatism.
Your last point may be true, but never underestimate the lure of being PM and getting your photo on the staircase at No. 10. Osborne will give his right arm for it IMHO, and why not. Whether others will be able to stop him is another matter.
As to Javid. I just don't get it, other than the back-story. I'll not be betting on him.0 -
Hold on.. he's said that the current terms of EU membership are unacceptable and only a renegotiated relationship will do. If he doesn't get it then he rules nothing out.antifrank said:
Advocating Prime Ministerial purdah seems a bit extreme. He's entitled to his views. He's never made any secret of his default preference for staying in the EU.Casino_Royale said:
Leavers are unhappy that he's making arguments for the EU and against the EEA before he's even gone to the EU with his formal negotiation demands, yet alone got a deal.antifrank said:David Cameron is well within his rights to point out that Norwegian politicians consider Norway's relations with the EU have downsides. If Leavers are going to be so brittle about every inconvenient argument, we will run out of Valium in the next two years.
What happened to 'ruling nothing out'?
He seems to be ruling quite a bit out.
At what points do you accept that the Prime Minister could properly argue for the benefits of EU membership? Or is it the case that you just don't like him doing this, full stop?
If he's saying that actually he prefers to stay in the EU anyway, then that makes a sham of his publicly declared position and he's just going through the motions.
There's nothing hysterical about that, except to die-hard EUphiles.
To answer your question, I think the PM should declare he is reserving judgement and maintaining an open mind *until* his deal is secured, saying on what terms he thinks the EU is good (with strong caveats linked to his deal) if necessary.
He's not a private citizen here. He's entitled to hold whatever views he really does in private but publicly he is our PM and has been elected to advance our interests - he should carefully judge what he says in public to support that.
Do you think that's unreasonable?0 -
As long as dishonest and duplicitous tactics don't take hold over the EU referendum, by 2025 we should have been in power for 15 years. Virtually any government looks tired and stale at that point. We will need new faces, new thinkers, and new ideas to win a fourth term.Casino_Royale said:
Yes, Javid being the obvious one.antifrank said:
That depends who they selected instead. The Conservatives have quite a few entirely viable candidates.DavidL said:
The Tory membership not selecting Osborne would be at least as ridiculous as the Labour party rejecting Healey for Foot. I mean its possible but it would come with a terrible price.Casino_Royale said:
Your third sentence is the problem for GO.antifrank said:We're a few years off from the change of Conservative leadership: two at a minimum. So short term ups and downs aren't that important. George Osborne's problems with tax credits wouldn't matter at all if they didn't reinforce the previously held view of him.
Meanwhile, he continues to have a huge support base in the Parliamentary party and in all likelihood David Cameron will discreetly try to assist his friend by timing his own resignation for the most helpful moment. If George Osborne wants the job, he is almost certainly going to be in the last two. The market has overreacted.
If he wants it, he will probably make the last two. But he has to win the membership vote too and, of that, I'm not so sure.
I'm still not at all sure that George Osborne will ultimately run. If he can carry on doing what he's doing now, he'd probably prefer to see a protege in Number 10. So look closely at his political friends. The successor to David Cameron may be one of those.
Osborne has serious flaws as a frontman. He really struggles to connect.
Also I don't think he's ever got over his obsession with The Project and takes too many of his lessons from New Labour.
We are beyond that now and as we move into the 2020s we need a fresh vision of Conservatism.0 -
Outbreaks of hysteria? No. Correcting a man who repeatedly claims that Norway is a fax democracy? Yes. It is an inconvenient truth for those in favour of remaining in the EU, but it is the truth nonetheless.antifrank said:
Others are welcome to make their own arguments. The wanton outbreaks of hysteria from the hardline BOOers every time the Prime Minister expresses his own views on the EU do them no credit at all.MP_SE said:
I am sure Dave will mention that only 15% of Norwegians want to join the EU...antifrank said:David Cameron is well within his rights to point out that Norwegian politicians consider Norway's relations with the EU have downsides. If Leavers are going to be so brittle about every inconvenient argument, we will run out of Valium in the next two years.
Personally, I can't see a huge amount of relevance to the UK of Norway's position either way. Its circumstances are too different from our own.0 -
Which hardline BOOers have had an outbreak of hysteria?antifrank said:
Others are welcome to make their own arguments. The wanton outbreaks of hysteria from the hardline BOOers every time the Prime Minister expresses his own views on the EU do them no credit at all.MP_SE said:
I am sure Dave will mention that only 15% of Norwegians want to join the EU...antifrank said:David Cameron is well within his rights to point out that Norwegian politicians consider Norway's relations with the EU have downsides. If Leavers are going to be so brittle about every inconvenient argument, we will run out of Valium in the next two years.
Personally, I can't see a huge amount of relevance to the UK of Norway's position either way. Its circumstances are too different from our own.
Frankly, the people that accuse others of "hysteria" or "banging on" or being "swivel-eyed" tend to be the ones that are most zealously ideological themselves. Typically, people resort to insults when they do not have good counter arguments.0 -
What exactly makes Javid any good here? He's useless on the telly, and no better at Finance Qs.
Having a humble-ish back story and a Muslim? Sorry, I'd rather a competent candidate than a collection of identity politics boxes tickedCasino_Royale said:
Yes, Javid being the obvious one.antifrank said:
That depends who they selected instead. The Conservatives have quite a few entirely viable candidates.DavidL said:
The Tory membership not selecting Osborne would be at least as ridiculous as the Labour party rejecting Healey for Foot. I mean its possible but it would come with a terrible price.Casino_Royale said:
Your third sentence is the problem for GO.antifrank said:We're a few years off from the change of Conservative leadership: two at a minimum. So short term ups and downs aren't that important. George Osborne's problems with tax credits wouldn't matter at all if they didn't reinforce the previously held view of him.
Meanwhile, he continues to have a huge support base in the Parliamentary party and in all likelihood David Cameron will discreetly try to assist his friend by timing his own resignation for the most helpful moment. If George Osborne wants the job, he is almost certainly going to be in the last two. The market has overreacted.
If he wants it, he will probably make the last two. But he has to win the membership vote too and, of that, I'm not so sure.
I'm still not at all sure that George Osborne will ultimately run. If he can carry on doing what he's doing now, he'd probably prefer to see a protege in Number 10. So look closely at his political friends. The successor to David Cameron may be one of those.
Osborne has serious flaws as a frontman. He really struggles to connect.
Also I don't think he's ever got over his obsession with The Project and takes too many of his lessons from New Labour.
We are beyond that now and as we move into the 2020s we need a fresh vision of Conservatism.0 -
Miss Plato, must agree. Not seen much of him, though the little I have did not leave a particularly positive impression.
I doubt he's as bad as Warsi, but she's a recent example of the idiocy of promoting people who tick the 'right' demographic boxes.0 -
"Banging on" and "swivel eyed" are copyright D Cameron.JEO said:
Which hardline BOOers have had an outbreak of hysteria?antifrank said:
Others are welcome to make their own arguments. The wanton outbreaks of hysteria from the hardline BOOers every time the Prime Minister expresses his own views on the EU do them no credit at all.MP_SE said:
I am sure Dave will mention that only 15% of Norwegians want to join the EU...antifrank said:David Cameron is well within his rights to point out that Norwegian politicians consider Norway's relations with the EU have downsides. If Leavers are going to be so brittle about every inconvenient argument, we will run out of Valium in the next two years.
Personally, I can't see a huge amount of relevance to the UK of Norway's position either way. Its circumstances are too different from our own.
Frankly, the people that accuse others of "hysteria" or "banging on" or being "swivel-eyed" tend to be the ones that are most zealously ideological themselves. Typically, people resort to insults when they do not have good counter arguments.0 -
Shop was probably out of bog roll.TheScreamingEagles said:Corbyn's first betrayal. Caught with a copy of The Sun. Bootle is now a Tory target.
@MichaelPDeacon: The first betrayal. Via @JamesManning https://t.co/3QjdMf85D40 -
Gross profit £10.4mSean_F said:
I hold no brief for Osborne, but if the Company hasn't paid CT, it's because the Company hasn't made a profit over that period.redcliffe62 said:If UK collected more Corporation Tax the need to cut welfare would lessen.
Sadly companies like Osborne and Little with a turnover since 2008 of 200m have creatively manage to pay nothing, ZERO, actually claiming a Corporation Tax refund. The Baronet running it gets about 600k a year.
If you wonder why the books of the country do not balance start with the Chancellor and his family and work your way down.
It IS legal. Fair enough. Whether it should be is a moot point.
Imagine if companies paid a fairer share? Even a 0.5% revenue tax would turn it around.
If I was Labour I would promote this farce in the MSM at every opportunity and Osborne would not even be a Dinky car toy let alone a VW.
Salaries £6.3m
Directors Emoluments £1.26m
Pre tax profit £229k
Tax (£435k)
Post tax profit £664k
Cash in bank at £500k at 31 Mar 14
0 -
That David Cameron he would prefer Britain to stay in the EU if it can is not news to at least one well-known BOOer (who is notably less hysterical than most):Casino_Royale said:
Hold on.. he's said that the current terms of EU membership are unacceptable and only a renegotiated relationship will do. If he doesn't get it then he rules nothing out.antifrank said:
Advocating Prime Ministerial purdah seems a bit extreme. He's entitled to his views. He's never made any secret of his default preference for staying in the EU.Casino_Royale said:
Leavers are unhappy that he's making arguments for the EU and against the EEA before he's even gone to the EU with his formal negotiation demands, yet alone got a deal.antifrank said:David Cameron is well within his rights to point out that Norwegian politicians consider Norway's relations with the EU have downsides. If Leavers are going to be so brittle about every inconvenient argument, we will run out of Valium in the next two years.
What happened to 'ruling nothing out'?
He seems to be ruling quite a bit out.
At what points do you accept that the Prime Minister could properly argue for the benefits of EU membership? Or is it the case that you just don't like him doing this, full stop?
If he's saying that actually he prefers to stay in the EU anyway, then that makes a sham of his publicly declared position and he's just going through the motions.
There's nothing hysterical about that, except to die-hard EUphiles.
To answer your question, I think the PM should declare he is reserving judgement and maintaining an open mind *until* his deal is secured, saying on what terms he thinks the EU is good (with strong caveats linked to his deal) if necessary.
He's not a private citizen here. He's entitled to hold whatever views he really does in private but publicly he is our PM and has been elected to advance our interests - he should carefully judge what he says in public to support that.
Do you think that's unreasonable?
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/100264175/david-cameron-wants-to-stay-in-the-eu-on-something-like-the-current-terms-but-hes-our-only-chance-of-a-referendum/
He has made no secret of that.
You want our foremost politician, who coincidentally is known to hold views on a subject that you strongly disagree with, not to express those views on that subject. I can see why you might hold that position. But yes, I think it's entirely unreasonable.0 -
What you are saying is that you want to move beyond NewCasino_Royale said:
We are beyond that now and as we move into the 2020s we need a fresh vision of Conservatism.LabourConservatism.
Sounds eerily familiar. I note that Boris Johnson also has a younger brother.
0 -
This debate about our lukewarm membership of the EU versus the EEA is very revealing, and is the reason why I don’t think the rift in the Conservative Party is as wide as it was in the past. The positions are not as polarised as they were twenty years ago. Firstly, the EU has grown so large that even the BOO people realise we need to come to some accommodation: membership of the EEA or a very similar trade agreement. Those wanting to remain in the EU don’t want to join the eurozone, don’t want to join Schengen and have ruled out ever-closer political union. The two choices are not that far apart. All parties accept that no major future changes can take place without another referendum. In or out of the EU I suspect we will still be arguing about access to markets, movement of labour and the decline of Europe relative to Asia and America.
The extremes have already left the party. Those who think we should be fully paid-up members of the eurozone are few and far between in the country yet alone the party; and those believing we can still enjoy complete sovereignty over our own affairs are in UKIP or living a dream.
0 -
Mr. Fernando, "All parties accept that no major future changes can take place without another referendum."
Hmm. All parties also committed to a referendum on Lisbon. Labour reneged (and I think the Lib Dems may have had a three line whip abstention).
I don't believe Labour or the Lib Dems would hold such a referendum, and have doubts as to whether the Conservatives would either.0 -
Catchy
@helenpidd: Middlesbrough fans' chant to Cameron: "You shagged a pig, you made it squeal,
get off your arse and Save our Steel" https://t.co/x6fSXTcr8G0 -
Yes the comparisons between GO and VW are perfectly valid- one is ridden with approvals avoiding corruption and union scandals, the other had his democratically earned mandate voted down by a bunch of LD luvvies who were justly turfed out en mass by the British public in May.
0 -
For those of us who enjoy the hospitality industries in the UK leaving the EU would be a catastrophe.I can't remember when I was last served by an English waiter or waitress (thank God).0
-
Jonathan..Does Corbyn actually wipe his own butt.. I thought Watson was hired to to do that..and he doesn't need paper0
-
Now that a referendum has been granted, what EU opponents need to do is concentrate on taking control of the debate away from Cameron and the FO/CBI unholy alliance.
We know they are not on our side. But they are also not as influential or clever as they think they are.
The key thing is to get the public engaged and interested. If we don't (and this is what the FO & Co. are hoping for) then they will default to the status quo I think. If there is a genuine upsurge of interest, the referendum is eminently winnable as the pro-EU side's arguments are transparently self-serving and intellectually empty.0 -
I'm increasingly interested in Gove.rottenborough said:
Morning all,Casino_Royale said:
Yes, Javid being the obvious one.antifrank said:
That depends who they selected instead. The Conservatives have quite a few entirely viable candidates.DavidL said:
The Tory membership not selecting Osborne would be at least as ridiculous as the Labour party rejecting Healey for Foot. I mean its possible but it would come with a terrible price.Casino_Royale said:
Your third sentence is the problem for GO.antifrank said:We're a few years off from the change of Conservative leadership: two at a minimum. So short term ups and downs aren't that important. George Osborne's problems with tax credits wouldn't matter at all if they didn't reinforce the previously held view of him.
Meanwhile, he continues to have a huge support base in the Parliamentary party and in all likelihood David Cameron will discreetly try to assist his friend by timing his own resignation for the most helpful moment. If George Osborne wants the job, he is almost certainly going to be in the last two. The market has overreacted.
If he wants it, he will probably make the last two. But he has to win the membership vote too and, of that, I'm not so sure.
I'm still not at all sure that George Osborne will ultimately run. If he can carry on doing what he's doing now, he'd probably prefer to see a protege in Number 10. So look closely at his political friends. The successor to David Cameron may be one of those.
Osborne has serious flaws as a frontman. He really struggles to connect.
Also I don't think he's ever got over his obsession with The Project and takes too many of his lessons from New Labour.
We are beyond that now and as we move into the 2020s we need a fresh vision of Conservatism.
Your last point may be true, but never underestimate the lure of being PM and getting your photo on the staircase at No. 10. Osborne will give his right arm for it IMHO, and why not. Whether others will be able to stop him is another matter.
As to Javid. I just don't get it, other than the back-story. I'll not be betting on him.
I want to believe in May, but doubt she is sincere. Truss/Soubry/Morgan are all soaking wet. Hammond is dull. Boris I trust even less.
My real problem is that most of the cabinet is alike in views and outlook. Jeremy Hunt is possible but a bit of an unknown to me.
I may - when I can be arsed - flick through all the junior ministers and the 2010/2015 intake for inspiration - Jesse Norman, Justine Greening, Priti Patel are interesting - but that's as far as my thinking takes me for now.0 -
Mr. Eagles, careful. You'll have the second edition of a certain book claiming they now have thousands of sources for an anecdote.
Mr. Roger, sometimes I think you're a double agent for Out
0 -
There's absolutely nothing wrong with David Cameron making arguments to stay in the EU, if those are his views. But if he's serious about a renegotiation, he should be waiting until that is done before making them. And he should be honest in the arguments he makes. That is not too much to ask to anyone reasonable.0
-
Its almost like he doesn't want the next 2 years dominated by EU referendum chat.JEO said:There's absolutely nothing wrong with David Cameron making arguments to stay in the EU, if those are his views. But if he's serious about a renegotiation, he should be waiting until that is done before making them. And he should be honest in the arguments he makes. That is not too much to ask to anyone reasonable.
0 -
TSE And they expect help..0
-
I agree, but we're picking the leader for the third term. If he or she is fresh enough, then that could see a Conservative government through the 2020s as well.JEO said:
As long as dishonest and duplicitous tactics don't take hold over the EU referendum, by 2025 we should have been in power for 15 years. Virtually any government looks tired and stale at that point. We will need new faces, new thinkers, and new ideas to win a fourth term.Casino_Royale said:
Yes, Javid being the obvious one.antifrank said:
That depends who they selected instead. The Conservatives have quite a few entirely viable candidates.DavidL said:
The Tory membership not selecting Osborne would be at least as ridiculous as the Labour party rejecting Healey for Foot. I mean its possible but it would come with a terrible price.Casino_Royale said:
Your third sentence is the problem for GO.antifrank said:We're a few years off from the change of Conservative leadership: two at a minimum. So short term ups and downs aren't that important. George Osborne's problems with tax credits wouldn't matter at all if they didn't reinforce the previously held view of him.
Meanwhile, he continues to have a huge support base in the Parliamentary party and in all likelihood David Cameron will discreetly try to assist his friend by timing his own resignation for the most helpful moment. If George Osborne wants the job, he is almost certainly going to be in the last two. The market has overreacted.
If he wants it, he will probably make the last two. But he has to win the membership vote too and, of that, I'm not so sure.
I'm still not at all sure that George Osborne will ultimately run. If he can carry on doing what he's doing now, he'd probably prefer to see a protege in Number 10. So look closely at his political friends. The successor to David Cameron may be one of those.
Osborne has serious flaws as a frontman. He really struggles to connect.
Also I don't think he's ever got over his obsession with The Project and takes too many of his lessons from New Labour.
We are beyond that now and as we move into the 2020s we need a fresh vision of Conservatism.0 -
Filled with mistakes, but I'll just point out the easy one: it's 'en masse'.TGOHF said:Yes the comparisons between GO and VW are perfectly valid- one is ridden with approvals avoiding corruption and union scandals, the other had his democratically earned mandate voted down by a bunch of LD luvvies who were justly turfed out en mass by the British public in May.
0 -
I like Gove but I think he's just too abrasive.Casino_Royale said:
I'm increasingly interested in Gove.rottenborough said:
Morning all,Casino_Royale said:
Yes, Javid being the obvious one.antifrank said:
That depends who they selected instead. The Conservatives have quite a few entirely viable candidates.DavidL said:
The Tory membership not selecting Osborne would be at least as ridiculous as the Labour terrible price.Casino_Royale said:
Your third sentence is the problem for GO.antifrank said:We're a few years off from the change of Conservative leadership: two at a minimum. So short term ups and downs aren't that important. George Osborne's problems with tax credits wouldn't matter at all if they didn't reinforce the previously held view of him.
Meanwhile, he continues to have a huge support base in the Parliamentary party and in all d.
If he wants it, he will probably make the last two. But he has to win the membership vote too and, of that, I'm not so sure.
I'm still not at all sure that George Osborne will ultimately run. If he can carry on doing what he's doing now, he'd probably prefer to see a protege in Number 10. So look closely at his political friends. The successor to David Cameron may be one of those.
Osborne has serious flaws as a frontman. He really struggles to connect.
Also I don't think he's ever got over his obsession with The Project and takes too many of his lessons from New Labour.
We are beyond that now and as we move into the 2020s we need a fresh vision of Conservatism.
Your last point may be true, but never underestimate the lure of being PM and getting your photo on the staircase at No. 10. Osborne will give his right arm for it IMHO, and why not. Whether others will be able to stop him is another matter.
As to Javid. I just don't get it, other than the back-story. I'll not be betting on him.
I want to believe in May, but doubt she is sincere. Truss/Soubry/Morgan are all soaking wet. Hammond is dull. Boris I trust even less.
My real problem is that most of the cabinet is alike in views and outlook. Jeremy Hunt is possible but a bit of an unknown to me.
I may - when I can be arsed - flick through all the junior ministers and the 2010/2015 intake for inspiration - Jesse Norman, Justine Greening, Priti Patel are interesting - but that's as far as my thinking takes me for now.
My choice to replace Cameron is Johnny Mercer0 -
I assume that Osborne and little reclaims tax due to reclaiming pretty much all available Annual investment allowance up to £500,000. Add in some non taxable items in the p&l, and the tax figure makes sense.0
-
Antifrank is one of the best tipsters and writers here - extremely intelligent, excellent tips and courteous.JEO said:
Which hardline BOOers have had an outbreak of hysteria?antifrank said:
Others are welcome to make their own arguments. The wanton outbreaks of hysteria from the hardline BOOers every time the Prime Minister expresses his own views on the EU do them no credit at all.MP_SE said:
I am sure Dave will mention that only 15% of Norwegians want to join the EU...antifrank said:David Cameron is well within his rights to point out that Norwegian politicians consider Norway's relations with the EU have downsides. If Leavers are going to be so brittle about every inconvenient argument, we will run out of Valium in the next two years.
Personally, I can't see a huge amount of relevance to the UK of Norway's position either way. Its circumstances are too different from our own.
Frankly, the people that accuse others of "hysteria" or "banging on" or being "swivel-eyed" tend to be the ones that are most zealously ideological themselves. Typically, people resort to insults when they do not have good counter arguments.
However, he totally loses it on the following subjects: the EU, immigration and UKIP. But that's ok, I lose it on foxhunting.
None of us are perfect.0 -
How to win friends and influence people.TheScreamingEagles said:Catchy
@helenpidd: Middlesbrough fans' chant to Cameron: "You shagged a pig, you made it squeal,
get off your arse and Save our Steel" https://t.co/x6fSXTcr8G
Very funny though.0 -
Bluntly, if a company can't make a reasonable profit while paying its staff a decent wage it shouldn't be in business.foxinsoxuk said:
I am sceptical about the increasing minimum wage though. It is likely to stress some organisations to the wall financially, especially in social care, and also to push up immigration.
We may need to decide that, as a country, we want to pay more for social care; we probably have to cut out some of the pointless regulations, especially around property costs, to reduce the operating costs of the social care providers; and providers may need to accept a lower return.
These are all acceptable trade offs.
Running a business that only survives because of a supply of cheap labour is not acceptanle0 -
Showing your true colours, Roger.Roger said:For those of us who enjoy the hospitality industries in the UK leaving the EU would be a catastrophe.I can't remember when I was last served by an English waiter or waitress (thank God).
Or perhaps the English staff simply don't want to serve you?
0 -
I quite agree with you.Plato_Says said:What exactly makes Javid any good here? He's useless on the telly, and no better at Finance Qs.
Having a humble-ish back story and a Muslim? Sorry, I'd rather a competent candidate than a collection of identity politics boxes tickedCasino_Royale said:
Yes, Javid being the obvious one.antifrank said:
That depends who they selected instead. The Conservatives have quite a few entirely viable candidates.DavidL said:
The Tory membership not selecting Osborne would be at least as ridiculous as the Labour party rejecting Healey for Foot. I mean its possible but it would come with a terrible price.Casino_Royale said:
Your third sentence is the problem for GO.antifrank said:We're a few years off from the change of Conservative leadership: two at a minimum. So short term ups and downs aren't that important. George Osborne's problems with tax credits wouldn't matter at all if they didn't reinforce the previously held view of him.
Meanwhile, he continues to have a huge support base in the Parliamentary party and in all likelihood David Cameron will discreetly try to assist his friend by timing his own resignation for the most helpful moment. If George Osborne wants the job, he is almost certainly going to be in the last two. The market has overreacted.
If he wants it, he will probably make the last two. But he has to win the membership vote too and, of that, I'm not so sure.
I'm still not at all sure that George Osborne will ultimately run. If he can carry on doing what he's doing now, he'd probably prefer to see a protege in Number 10. So look closely at his political friends. The successor to David Cameron may be one of those.
Osborne has serious flaws as a frontman. He really struggles to connect.
Also I don't think he's ever got over his obsession with The Project and takes too many of his lessons from New Labour.
We are beyond that now and as we move into the 2020s we need a fresh vision of Conservatism.0 -
But, the company must have made a loss at some point, that enables it to recover CT. A profit of £229k over six years is tiny, and there must have been some years of heavy losses.Pulpstar said:
Gross profit £10.4mSean_F said:
I hold no brief for Osborne, but if the Company hasn't paid CT, it's because the Company hasn't made a profit over that period.redcliffe62 said:If UK collected more Corporation Tax the need to cut welfare would lessen.
Sadly companies like Osborne and Little with a turnover since 2008 of 200m have creatively manage to pay nothing, ZERO, actually claiming a Corporation Tax refund. The Baronet running it gets about 600k a year.
If you wonder why the books of the country do not balance start with the Chancellor and his family and work your way down.
It IS legal. Fair enough. Whether it should be is a moot point.
Imagine if companies paid a fairer share? Even a 0.5% revenue tax would turn it around.
If I was Labour I would promote this farce in the MSM at every opportunity and Osborne would not even be a Dinky car toy let alone a VW.
Salaries £6.3m
Directors Emoluments £1.26m
Pre tax profit £229k
Tax (£435k)
Post tax profit £664k
Cash in bank at £500k at 31 Mar 140 -
The mask slips. Pure bigotry.Roger said:For those of us who enjoy the hospitality industries in the UK leaving the EU would be a catastrophe.I can't remember when I was last served by an English waiter or waitress (thank God).
0 -
Anyone who disagrees is 'hysterical', an 'arsehole' or a caveman/dinosaur (can't remember the exact put down used)... ShameCasino_Royale said:
Antifrank is one of the best tipsters and writers here - extremely intelligent, excellent tips and courteous.JEO said:
Which hardline BOOers have had an outbreak of hysteria?antifrank said:
Others are welcome to make their own arguments. The wanton outbreaks of hysteria from the hardline BOOers every time the Prime Minister expresses his own views on the EU do them no credit at all.MP_SE said:
I am sure Dave will mention that only 15% of Norwegians want to join the EU...antifrank said:David Cameron is well within his rights to point out that Norwegian politicians consider Norway's relations with the EU have downsides. If Leavers are going to be so brittle about every inconvenient argument, we will run out of Valium in the next two years.
Personally, I can't see a huge amount of relevance to the UK of Norway's position either way. Its circumstances are too different from our own.
Frankly, the people that accuse others of "hysteria" or "banging on" or being "swivel-eyed" tend to be the ones that are most zealously ideological themselves. Typically, people resort to insults when they do not have good counter arguments.
However, he totally loses it on the following subjects: the EU, immigration and UKIP. But that's ok, I lose it on foxhunting.
None of us are perfect.0 -
Great tip. I love Mercer but surely far too soon?TheScreamingEagles said:
I like Gove but I think he's just too abrasive.Casino_Royale said:
I'm increasingly interested in Gove.rottenborough said:
Morning all,Casino_Royale said:
Yes, Javid being the obvious one.antifrank said:
That depends who they selected instead. The Conservatives have quite a few entirely viable candidates.DavidL said:
The Tory membership not selecting Osborne would be at least as ridiculous as the Labour terrible price.Casino_Royale said:
Your third sentence is the problem for GO.antifrank said:We're a few years off from the change of Conservative leadership: two at a minimum. So short term ups and downs aren't that important. George Osborne's problems with tax credits wouldn't matter at all if they didn't reinforce the previously held view of him.
Meanwhile, he continues to have a huge support base in the Parliamentary party and in all d.
If he wants it, he will probably make the last two. But he has to win the membership vote too and, of that, I'm not so sure.
I'm still not at all sure that George Osborne will ultimately run. If he can carry on doing what he's doing now, he'd probably prefer to see a protege in Number 10. So look closely at his political friends. The successor to David Cameron may be one of those.
Osborne has serious flaws as a frontman. He really struggles to connect.
Also I don't think he's ever got over his obsession with The Project and takes too many of his lessons from New Labour.
We are beyond that now and as we move into the 2020s we need a fresh vision of Conservatism.
Your last point may be true, but never underestimate the lure of being PM and getting your photo on the staircase at No. 10. Osborne will give his right arm for it IMHO, and why not. Whether others will be able to stop him is another matter.
As to Javid. I just don't get it, other than the back-story. I'll not be betting on him.
I want to believe in May, but doubt she is sincere. Truss/Soubry/Morgan are all soaking wet. Hammond is dull. Boris I trust even less.
My real problem is that most of the cabinet is alike in views and outlook. Jeremy Hunt is possible but a bit of an unknown to me.
I may - when I can be arsed - flick through all the junior ministers and the 2010/2015 intake for inspiration - Jesse Norman, Justine Greening, Priti Patel are interesting - but that's as far as my thinking takes me for now.
My choice to replace Cameron is Johnny Mercer
If he gets ministerial experience under his belt in the next 2-3 years then maybe.
Who is offering odds on him?0 -
I'm not sure, I'm too tight to pay for duedil's full serviceSean_F said:
But, the company must have made a loss at some point, that enables it to recover CT. A profit of £229k over six years is tiny, and there must have been some years of heavy losses.Pulpstar said:
Gross profit £10.4mSean_F said:
I hold no brief for Osborne, but if the Company hasn't paid CT, it's because the Company hasn't made a profit over that period.redcliffe62 said:If UK collected more Corporation Tax the need to cut welfare would lessen.
Sadly companies like Osborne and Little with a turnover since 2008 of 200m have creatively manage to pay nothing, ZERO, actually claiming a Corporation Tax refund. The Baronet running it gets about 600k a year.
If you wonder why the books of the country do not balance start with the Chancellor and his family and work your way down.
It IS legal. Fair enough. Whether it should be is a moot point.
Imagine if companies paid a fairer share? Even a 0.5% revenue tax would turn it around.
If I was Labour I would promote this farce in the MSM at every opportunity and Osborne would not even be a Dinky car toy let alone a VW.
Salaries £6.3m
Directors Emoluments £1.26m
Pre tax profit £229k
Tax (£435k)
Post tax profit £664k
Cash in bank at £500k at 31 Mar 14
0 -
Mr. Royale, as Asimov said: People who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.
Edited extra bit: and, as I've mentioned, Justine Greening/Priti Patel will be the next Conservative leader.0 -
Tough old life in Roger world..when he can only discuss the quality of the servants..0
-
Pulpstar, more tax would have been paid on the salaries and directors' emoluments than if the money had remained in the company as profit subject to corporation tax.
No doubt, if HMRC are not satisfied that there was a tax loss, they are well capable of making the case to the company. At least, that has always been my experience.0 -
*Sigh* totally missing the point.antifrank said:
That David Cameron he would prefer Britain to stay in the EU if it can is not news to at least one well-known BOOer (who is notably less hysterical than most):Casino_Royale said:
Hold on.. he's said that the current terms of EU membership are unacceptable and only a renegotiated relationship will do. If he doesn't get it then he rules nothing out.antifrank said:
Advocating Prime Ministerial purdah seems a bit extreme. He's entitled to his views. He's never made any secret of his default preference for staying in the EU.Casino_Royale said:
Leavers are unhappy that he's making arguments for the EU and against the EEA before he's even gone to the EU with his formal negotiation demands, yet alone got a deal.antifrank said:David Cameron is well within his rights to point out that Norwegian politicians consider Norway's relations with the EU have downsides. If Leavers are going to be so brittle about every inconvenient argument, we will run out of Valium in the next two years.
What happened to 'ruling nothing out'?
He seems to be ruling quite a bit out.
At what points do you accept that the Prime Minister could properly argue for the benefits of EU membership? Or is it the case that you just don't like him doing this, full stop?
If he's saying that actually he prefers to stay in the EU anyway, then that makes a sham of his publicly declared position and he's just going through the motions.
There's nothing hysterical about that, except to die-hard EUphiles.
To answer your question, I think the PM should declare he is reserving judgement and maintaining an open mind *until* his deal is secured, saying on what terms he thinks the EU is good (with strong caveats linked to his deal) if necessary.
He's not a private citizen here. He's entitled to hold whatever views he really does in private but publicly he is our PM and has been elected to advance our interests - he should carefully judge what he says in public to support that.
Do you think that's unreasonable?
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/100264175/david-cameron-wants-to-stay-in-the-eu-on-something-like-the-current-terms-but-hes-our-only-chance-of-a-referendum/
He has made no secret of that.
You want our foremost politician, who coincidentally is known to hold views on a subject that you strongly disagree with, not to express those views on that subject. I can see why you might hold that position. But yes, I think it's entirely unreasonable.
No point engaging with you further on this matter if you are going to be so ludicrous.0 -
On the subject of the EU I'm on the fence. When I come into contact with committed Remainders, I incline to Leave. When, as this morning, the Leavers are in the ascendancy, I gain a renewed appreciation of the EU.Casino_Royale said:
Antifrank is one of the best tipsters and writers here - extremely intelligent, excellent tips and courteous.JEO said:
Which hardline BOOers have had an outbreak of hysteria?antifrank said:
Others are welcome to make their own arguments. The wanton outbreaks of hysteria from the hardline BOOers every time the Prime Minister expresses his own views on the EU do them no credit at all.MP_SE said:
I am sure Dave will mention that only 15% of Norwegians want to join the EU...antifrank said:David Cameron is well within his rights to point out that Norwegian politicians consider Norway's relations with the EU have downsides. If Leavers are going to be so brittle about every inconvenient argument, we will run out of Valium in the next two years.
Personally, I can't see a huge amount of relevance to the UK of Norway's position either way. Its circumstances are too different from our own.
Frankly, the people that accuse others of "hysteria" or "banging on" or being "swivel-eyed" tend to be the ones that are most zealously ideological themselves. Typically, people resort to insults when they do not have good counter arguments.
However, he totally loses it on the following subjects: the EU, immigration and UKIP. But that's ok, I lose it on foxhunting.
None of us are perfect.0 -
You've been a regular on here longer than I have, but I find there are four individuals on here that tend to insult people regularly, and antifrank is one of them. It doesn't set a good impression.Casino_Royale said:
Antifrank is one of the best tipsters and writers here - extremely intelligent, excellent tips and courteous.JEO said:
Which hardline BOOers have had an outbreak of hysteria?antifrank said:
Others are welcome to make their own arguments. The wanton outbreaks of hysteria from the hardline BOOers every time the Prime Minister expresses his own views on the EU do them no credit at all.MP_SE said:
I am sure Dave will mention that only 15% of Norwegians want to join the EU...antifrank said:David Cameron is well within his rights to point out that Norwegian politicians consider Norway's relations with the EU have downsides. If Leavers are going to be so brittle about every inconvenient argument, we will run out of Valium in the next two years.
Personally, I can't see a huge amount of relevance to the UK of Norway's position either way. Its circumstances are too different from our own.
Frankly, the people that accuse others of "hysteria" or "banging on" or being "swivel-eyed" tend to be the ones that are most zealously ideological themselves. Typically, people resort to insults when they do not have good counter arguments.
However, he totally loses it on the following subjects: the EU, immigration and UKIP. But that's ok, I lose it on foxhunting.
None of us are perfect.0 -
You can carry a loss back 12 months or forward into another tax year as I understand it:Pulpstar said:
I'm not sure, I'm too tight to pay for duedil's full serviceSean_F said:
But, the company must have made a loss at some point, that enables it to recover CT. A profit of £229k over six years is tiny, and there must have been some years of heavy losses.Pulpstar said:
Gross profit £10.4mSean_F said:
I hold no brief for Osborne, but if the Company hasn't paid CT, it's because the Company hasn't made a profit over that period.redcliffe62 said:If UK collected more Corporation Tax the need to cut welfare would lessen.
Sadly companies like Osborne and Little with a turnover since 2008 of 200m have creatively manage to pay nothing, ZERO, actually claiming a Corporation Tax refund. The Baronet running it gets about 600k a year.
If you wonder why the books of the country do not balance start with the Chancellor and his family and work your way down.
It IS legal. Fair enough. Whether it should be is a moot point.
Imagine if companies paid a fairer share? Even a 0.5% revenue tax would turn it around.
If I was Labour I would promote this farce in the MSM at every opportunity and Osborne would not even be a Dinky car toy let alone a VW.
Salaries £6.3m
Directors Emoluments £1.26m
Pre tax profit £229k
Tax (£435k)
Post tax profit £664k
Cash in bank at £500k at 31 Mar 14
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/corporation-tax-calculating-and-claiming-a-loss
But a bit irrelevant surely? Osborne, as in George, must have put his shares into some kind of sleep mode or blind trust or whatever as he is a minister.0 -
Mr. Antifrank, surprised you're content to let the views of others, and your dislike of such, sway your opinion that way.0
-
You don't think it's appropriate for David Cameron to express his views now because it's "too soon". Once the referendum campaign is in full swing you'll no doubt think it's inappropriate for him to express his views because "he should be above the campaign".Casino_Royale said:
*Sigh* totally missing the point.
No point engaging with you further on this matter if you are going to be so ludicrous.
Can you pin down for me the five minutes when you believe that he is entitled to express his opinions? Or does he need to wait until after the referendum campaign is over now?0 -
No. I think there were lessons to learn in the 2000s about how the Conservatives came across to people, and that they welcomed all support.Jonathan said:
What you are saying is that you want to move beyond NewCasino_Royale said:
We are beyond that now and as we move into the 2020s we need a fresh vision of Conservatism.LabourConservatism.
Sounds eerily familiar. I note that Boris Johnson also has a younger brother.
I don't think all the right ones were heeded: the main one being we are seen as the party of the rich, and we've only belatedly realised that it was diversity in the social background of candidates we needed not their physical appearance.
I think it was stupid to eviscerate our own membership just to make a point. That identity politics is absurd and that liberal attitudes to immigration are a serious mistake.
I will be looking for someone who puts Britain, its society and the national interest first in its Conservatism, and doesn't make it all about the money.0 -
100/1 as next Tory leader with LadbrokesCasino_Royale said:Great tip. I love Mercer but surely far too soon?
If he gets ministerial experience under his belt in the next 2-3 years then maybe.
Who is offering odds on him?
Dave became Tory leader four years after becoming an MP, so Mercer can follow that trajectory is possible.0 -
You can't divorce the arguments from the people making them. As things stand, if we leave the EU, we are electing to be led by inward-looking grouchy hysterical maniacs. If we stay in the EU, we are electing to be led by arrogant disingenuous faceless bureaucrats. The vote is as much about identity as the economy.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Antifrank, surprised you're content to let the views of others, and your dislike of such, sway your opinion that way.
Neither of those identities are appealing to me and contact with each reinforces the appeal of the other.0 -
It's very clear the hospitality and retail sector has a very strong vested interest in staying in the EU, as it benefits from cheap European labour. This is why I think it was a mistake to put a big retail guy to head the Remain campaign.Roger said:For those of us who enjoy the hospitality industries in the UK leaving the EU would be a catastrophe.I can't remember when I was last served by an English waiter or waitress (thank God).
0 -
Just a quick point - but wasn't he going to renegotiate our relationship... and then take a view ?antifrank said:
You don't think it's appropriate for David Cameron to express his views now because it's "too soon". Once the referendum campaign is in full swing you'll no doubt think it's inappropriate for him to express his views because "he should be above the campaign".Casino_Royale said:
*Sigh* totally missing the point.
No point engaging with you further on this matter if you are going to be so ludicrous.
Can you pin down for me the five minutes when you believe that he is entitled to express his opinions? Or does he need to wait until after the referendum campaign is over now?
Have the 'renegotiations' started ?0 -
If you use it
Facebook takes aim at Twitter and Google and makes 2 TRILLION public posts searchable (so check your privacy settings)
Facebook users are already making over 1.5 billion searches per day
Will now index all of its public posts - which currently number 2 trillion
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3285417/Facebook-make-2-TRILLION-public-posts-searchable-check-privacy-settings.html#ixzz3pr2bedC00 -
The politicians we elect in the UK will be very similar whether we are In or Out of the EU. I fully expect us to have a mainstream Conservative Prime Minister in 2020, whatever happens.antifrank said:
You can't divorce the arguments from the people making them. As things stand, if we leave the EU, we are electing to be led by inward-looking grouchy hysterical maniacs. If we stay in the EU, we are electing to be led by arrogant disingenuous faceless bureaucrats. The vote is as much about identity as the economy.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Antifrank, surprised you're content to let the views of others, and your dislike of such, sway your opinion that way.
Neither of those identities are appealing to me and contact with each reinforces the appeal of the other.0 -
Nonsense. I supported Cameron's initial position and wanted him (and still do want him) to succeed but it's clear where he's going now. And I am very disappointed about it. IIRC, Socrates said much the same thing.antifrank said:
You don't think it's appropriate for David Cameron to express his views now because it's "too soon". Once the referendum campaign is in full swing you'll no doubt think it's inappropriate for him to express his views because "he should be above the campaign".Casino_Royale said:
*Sigh* totally missing the point.
No point engaging with you further on this matter if you are going to be so ludicrous.
Can you pin down for me the five minutes when you believe that he is entitled to express his opinions? Or does he need to wait until after the referendum campaign is over now?
I've already said downthread how I think Cameron can express his views and give leadership, without compromising his own renegotiation.
I'm afraid I have to work now. I'm sure we can pick this up again later, hopefully once you've calmed down and had a good think.0 -
Mr. Antifrank, that's not the case.
A vote for Out is not a vote for Farage to be PM. Indeed, it'll serve to marginalise UKIP as their raison d'etre will be removed.0 -
He certainly was. I don't think he's ever disavowed his previously stated view that as a default he would prefer to stay in the EU though. Why should he not express his reasons for that view?Pulpstar said:
Just a quick point - but wasn't he going to renegotiate our relationship... and then take a view ?antifrank said:
You don't think it's appropriate for David Cameron to express his views now because it's "too soon". Once the referendum campaign is in full swing you'll no doubt think it's inappropriate for him to express his views because "he should be above the campaign".Casino_Royale said:
*Sigh* totally missing the point.
No point engaging with you further on this matter if you are going to be so ludicrous.
Can you pin down for me the five minutes when you believe that he is entitled to express his opinions? Or does he need to wait until after the referendum campaign is over now?
Have the 'renegotiations' started ?0 -
Well Quite.Morris_Dancer said:
Mr. Antifrank, that's not the case.
A vote for Out is not a vote for Farage to be PM. Indeed, it'll serve to marginalise UKIP as their raison d'etre will be removed.0 -
Indeed.MP_SE said:
A truly vile comment.Roger said:For those of us who enjoy the hospitality industries in the UK leaving the EU would be a catastrophe.I can't remember when I was last served by an English waiter or waitress (thank God).
Still, Roger's comment reminds us that should you wish to film a commercial for toilet paper, it's always best to choose a decent foreign Director, rather than a horrible bigoted English one, who hasn't noticed that everyone is spitting in his tea.0
