• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

UK PoliGAF thread of tell me about the rabbits again, Dave.

Nicktendo86

Member
Mar 24, 2009
7,497
206
1,100
35
London
Gloves are off with his comments today. He sounds desperate.

Oh, and Harman has been heckled by a man asking why she is only speaking to women, lol. Glad that stupid pink van is backfiring.
 

WayneMorse

Banned
Oct 2, 2013
2,165
0
0
Gloves are off with his comments today. He sounds desperate.

Oh, and Harman has been heckled by a man asking why she is only speaking to women, lol. Glad that stupid pink van is backfiring.

The Tories are in just as bad of shape is Labour is right now. I think both parties have given up hopes for majorities in this point.
 

kmag

Member
Aug 27, 2012
7,154
0
0
Gloves are off with his comments today. He sounds desperate.

Oh, and Harman has been heckled by a man asking why she is only speaking to women, lol. Glad that stupid pink van is backfiring.

It's actually a bit beyond the joke. If you look at the transcript it actually reads as if he gave Cameron a shoeing. On paper, removing the personalities, Cameron sounds completely shifty and Milliband actually torpedoes him relatively well, Cameron point blank refused to answer every question asking whether he'd ever spoken to Green about the tax issue. (not just from Ed, Labour did a pretty good job of having their MP's back up the questioning) However looking at the video, Milliband presentation is so chronic he barely actually lands a punch, and for all Cameron's faults he manages to bat most of it away.

Ed just isn't cut out for this political leadership malarky, even if he's saying the right things on occasion, he just can't get the message across effectively.

But the single best poltical fuck up today, was the Labour MP and candidate pictured standing outside an NHS centre with saying "V interesting visit to Glenwood Health Centre in #Glenrothes w @JennyMarra but clear short-staffing is a big problem" . Problem is the centre they're standing outside of was closed 8 months ago and replaced with a new state of the art centre down the road.

http://www.thecourier.co.uk/news/po...ocked-for-fife-health-centre-blunder-1.835199
 

zomgbbqftw

Banned
Jan 21, 2011
14,538
0
0
The number one issue with all this shit about tax avoidance is that the legislative record from the current government is about 100x better than the previous one and all of the alleged incidents occurred when Labour were in power turning a blind eye to the worst City excesses in order to reap the massive tax windfall it brought.

I don't know the details of the case with the minister or the person accused by Miliband today, but I do know for a fact that the HSBC disc was bought by HMRC in February 2010, if Labour wanted to release the details the could have done so back then, but chose not to so HMRC could work on getting some of the money back from the evaders and closing the avoidance loopholes. This government too exactly the same view, so the claim that nothing is happening is literally bullshit.

Also, using Parliamentary privilege in this manner to defame a probably innocent person (AIUI this Lord Fink fellow actually lived in Switzerland for a long period of time) diminishes the standing of Parliament itself. Ed should either back up this claim by repeating outside of Parliament and presenting hard evidence or retract them and apologise. Politicians should not (ab)use Parliamentary privilege for political ends. It should be reserved for fighting injustice such as the superinjunctions that prevented ordinary people from continuing their lives freely and without impediment.

Edit: As an aside, the betfair market has been pretty crazy over the last few minutes, Lab Majority went as high as 32 (I backed them at 29 and it is already down to 21 again). The YouGov poll usually becomes more widely known around now.
 

Nicktendo86

Member
Mar 24, 2009
7,497
206
1,100
35
London
Labour lead of 1 zomg, standard stuff.

Milliband has to say something now. He can't just say he will repeat the accusations outside parliament at some point, say it now and back up the claims or apologise but he will obviously hope people forget it or fudge the whole thing. Pathetic little shit, I really can't stand him.
 
D

Deleted member 231381

Unconfirmed Member
Edit: As an aside, the betfair market has been pretty crazy over the last few minutes, Lab Majority went as high as 32 (I backed them at 29 and it is already down to 21 again). The YouGov poll usually becomes more widely known around now.

You bet on Labour majority rather than Labour plurality?
 

zomgbbqftw

Banned
Jan 21, 2011
14,538
0
0
You bet on Labour majority rather than Labour plurality?

Yes, it is a good hedge at 29.

As a rule, I'm in it to make money which means if there are opportunities to make money on a Labour victory then I will take them. Last time around I made a significant sum betting on Ed Balls holding on in Morley and Outwood when the markets were shifting pretty decisively against him after the Tory candidate released the "castrate Balls" video on YouTube.
 

Nicktendo86

Member
Mar 24, 2009
7,497
206
1,100
35
London
I think Miliband might regret bringing up the tax avoidance of individuals, the papers seem to be rubbing their hands in glee at the prospect of MP's arrangements being fair game.
 

zomgbbqftw

Banned
Jan 21, 2011
14,538
0
0
Fine by me.

Considering the only party that gains from the mud-slinging is UKIP I'm surprised you would take that attitude. The outcome from all of this has always been "a pox on both your houses". Previously the Lib Dems would benefit, but I find that unlikely this time which leaves UKIP as the primary beneficiary possibly along with the Greens but their leader is probably too useless to take advantage and Farage is good at this kind of stuff.

Specific to Miliband it is exactly the same as when Boris and Ken did the same thing, Boris, being wealthy, had no need to for complex tax arrangements but Ken had dirt all over his tax returns. If it comes down to it I expect Dave will have a much cleaner tax record than Ed, especially given the Deed of Variation that was put in place after the death of his father to protect themselves from £150,000 in inheritance tax.
 

Nicktendo86

Member
Mar 24, 2009
7,497
206
1,100
35
London
especially given the Deed of Variation that was put in place after the death of his father to protect themselves from £150,000 in inheritance tax.

That's the bit I really don't get, he must have know that would be brought up again, especially as that specific arrangement was called out by Brown, who's advisor was, guess who, Ed! Those in glass houses....
 

anonymous_abc

Member
Sep 26, 2011
8,548
0
1,000
Considering the only party that gains from the mud-slinging is UKIP I'm surprised you would take that attitude. The outcome from all of this has always been "a pox on both your houses". Previously the Lib Dems would benefit, but I find that unlikely this time which leaves UKIP as the primary beneficiary possibly along with the Greens but their leader is probably too useless to take advantage and Farage is good at this kind of stuff.

Specific to Miliband it is exactly the same as when Boris and Ken did the same thing, Boris, being wealthy, had no need to for complex tax arrangements but Ken had dirt all over his tax returns. If it comes down to it I expect Dave will have a much cleaner tax record than Ed, especially given the Deed of Variation that was put in place after the death of his father to protect themselves from £150,000 in inheritance tax.

MPs should be held to a high if not higher standard than many others. And they should know better than to veer too far off the well trodden path of regular tax codes. If they don't just use perfectly legal loopholes but actively dodge taxes they should be called out for it.
This potentially boosting UKIP has no bearing for me what so ever.
 

kmag

Member
Aug 27, 2012
7,154
0
0
That's the bit I really don't get, he must have know that would be brought up again, especially as that specific arrangement was called out by Brown, who's advisor was, guess who, Ed! Those in glass houses....

Ultimately the Millibands can reasonably say that no tax has actually been avoided due to the 2007 law change allowing dead spouses Inheritance Tax threshold to roll over to the surviving spouse. Of course it would have been different if his Mother had died prior to that point.

And frankly given Cameron's Dad's line of work, I don't doubt that Cameron has/will benefit greatly from tax 'friendly' inheritance even if Dave's hands are clean.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2012/apr/20/cameron-family-tax-havens
 

Nicktendo86

Member
Mar 24, 2009
7,497
206
1,100
35
London
Absolutely, I accuse no wrongdoing whatsoever. It is true what Lord Frink said, we all use tax avoidance of varying degrees to our benefit, whether it being exploiting death tax loopholes, Swizz accounts or simply buying goods at airports to avoid paying UK duty. My point is Miliband shouldn't get on his high horse about it when he himself has exploited measures (and has even today blamed it on his mum saying it was all her idea!)

Quite typical of wealthy socialists to have fine moral compasses, but they don't like being called out for the exact same behaviour they condemn. I am rambling now, apologies!

Edit: again amusing that you link a Guardian article Kmag, we all know their tax affairs are suspect ;)
 

kmag

Member
Aug 27, 2012
7,154
0
0
Absolutely, I accuse no wrongdoing whatsoever. It is true what Lord Frink said, we all use tax avoidance of varying degrees to our benefit, whether it being exploiting death tax loopholes, Swizz accounts or simply buying goods at airports to avoid paying UK duty. My point is Miliband shouldn't get on his high horse about it when he himself has exploited measures (and has even today blamed it on his mum saying it was all her idea!)

Quite typical of wealthy socialists to have fine moral compasses, but they don't like being called out for the exact same behaviour they condemn. I am rambling now, apologies!

Edit: again amusing that you link a Guardian article Kmag, we all know their tax affairs are suspect ;)

Frankly, I imagine most people not on PAYE (and even then a lot of those who have additional income) minimise tax to some extent. I don't go so far to include stuff like ISA's as the 'avoidance' there is clearly the intention of the law, but there's a myriad of options available if you're self employed or have multiple non salaried income streams.

Almost all publicly traded PLC's arguably have a duty to the shareholders to maximise return by being tax 'efficient'

I'm not big on getting that upset about it, and I don't think politicians should either. Instead if they want to avoid avoidance then they should aggressively legislate to do so.
 

zomgbbqftw

Banned
Jan 21, 2011
14,538
0
0
Frankly, I imagine most people not on PAYE (and even then a lot of those who have additional income) minimise tax to some extent. I don't go so far to include stuff like ISA's as the 'avoidance' there is clearly the intention of the law, but there's a myriad of options available if you're self employed or have multiple non salaried income streams.

Almost all publicly traded PLC's arguably have a duty to the shareholders to maximise return by being tax 'efficient'

I'm not big on getting that upset about it, and I don't think politicians should either. Instead if they want to avoid avoidance then they should aggressively legislate to do so.

That's always been my point and on the whole the government actually have a very good record on closing tax loopholes. All of the cases in question relate to 2005-2007, not post-2010. I personally know a few people who have been forced to re-domicile in the UK after certain loopholes were closed in the 2013 autumn statement. We're talking high income people who work in banking and finance as well, the one loophole that hasn't been closed is the one most used in the public sector and civil service (personal service companies).

As for Ed's now useless tax avoidance scheme, I personally don't have a problem with the avoidance. People should try and minimise their tax liabilities, it is the responsible course of action. My issue is with the hypocrisy; he, David and his mother clearly went for the Deed of Variation to avoid the large inheritance tax bill on Mrs Miliband and yet he decries tax avoidance by other people. He may not be making a tax saving after the DoV has been ruled as evasion, but the intent to do so was there which is just as bad.
 

kitch9

Banned
Jan 23, 2007
7,201
0
0
It all went downhill when Thatcher was gone. Labour singlehandedly dragged us into a financial crisi....I can't do it. I'm just trolling guys. But I'd rather not ruin this newborn thread already. Either way, I'm sure somewhere along the line, someone will say what I just said but be dead serious about it.

Thatcher was pretty much the last politician to take control and have courage in her own conviction instead of constantly pandering to those who shout loudest.

Love her or hate her that was admirable. Our politicians are pussys these days.
 

kitch9

Banned
Jan 23, 2007
7,201
0
0
Frankly, I imagine most people not on PAYE (and even then a lot of those who have additional income) minimise tax to some extent. I don't go so far to include stuff like ISA's as the 'avoidance' there is clearly the intention of the law, but there's a myriad of options available if you're self employed or have multiple non salaried income streams.

Almost all publicly traded PLC's arguably have a duty to the shareholders to maximise return by being tax 'efficient'

I'm not big on getting that upset about it, and I don't think politicians should either. Instead if they want to avoid avoidance then they should aggressively legislate to do so.

To be fair HMRC inspectors have pointed areas out to me were I was tax inefficient during inspection.

It's not up to the tax payer to decide what to pay, the tax payer should pay exactly what is due and not a penny more.
 

Maledict

Member
Feb 16, 2013
8,779
1
600
Um, Blair took is into a war which was not only unpopular with his own party, but demonstrably deeply unpopular with the entire country from the get go. Largest demonstrations since the Jarrow marches and all.

(Always perplexed me about Blair - morally flexible on many things, but on some issues he seriously didn't care if every other person in the UK disagreed).
 

Maledict

Member
Feb 16, 2013
8,779
1
600
Also, I reached my limit on the Molyneux thread. I cannot bear to read another american post about how the interview is a hit piece and terribly unfair and evil.

Do they even have journalists over there? God knows what they would make of PMs questions, or Paxman / Snow in full flow.
 

kmag

Member
Aug 27, 2012
7,154
0
0
Papers going after labour tax avoiding donors this morning.

Like I said, Ed will regret bringing it up...

Depends what you mean. In the papers which are pretty much universally pro Tory, probably but if not for this they'd be picking on one of Ed's eleventy billion other flaws this week, publicly with the electorate it still plays more into Conservative weakness. People don't trust the Tories motives even when they like their policies. Milliband's got such dire personal ratings he could take a shite on tv and his favourablity rating wouldn't drop that much, it's pretty much bottomed out.

The only thing which is negative about this from a Labour point of view is pissing off their rich donors. as long as the subject is still in the news it's probably a net negative for the Tories as it continues to play peoples underlying prejudices about that party (that they're there to benefit the rich first and foremost)

Now there's an argument that Labour could be (should be) tarred with they're all at it brush which only really helps the likes of the SNP, Greens and UKIP as the anti-political establishment parties (although how a party of Government in the SNP's case can be considered anti-political establishment is always a bit lost on me).
 

JonnyBrad

Member
Nov 27, 2007
2,253
0
0
There is a Thick of It episode where they deal with dodgy donors. Malcolm Tucker says to Stuart Pearson (they're the opposing spin doctors) that NOBODY talks about dodgy donors because all the parties end up looking like cunts.

Its the episode with the five live phone.

Once again real life imitates The Thick of It.
 

Lirlond

Member
Dec 5, 2008
4,386
0
0
Kmag: They're not anti political per say, just the specific politics that happen in the UK as a whole. The House of Lords, FPTP, two party system etc
 

kmag

Member
Aug 27, 2012
7,154
0
0
Kmag: They're not anti political per say, just the specific politics that happen in the UK as a whole. The House of Lords, FPTP, two party system etc

None of the parties are anti-political, I mean parties which are tapping into the anti-political "a pox on all their houses" sentiment.
 

Maledict

Member
Feb 16, 2013
8,779
1
600
I think the debates will go better for Labour than expected for a couple of reasons.

1) the bar has been set so low for Ed that as long as he doesn't foul himself on stage he will be seen to do well. In terms of expectation management, I cannot think of a time when someone has been viewed so negatively.

2) I think Cameron's plan re the Greens will backfire. I understand the theory behind it - use them to drain away Labours far left support in the same way UKIP drain away the Tories. However, the problem is that the Greens aren't UKIP. Farage has made a career out being a blokey, honest guy who says what a lot of people think and sounds rational like your mate down the pub. Clegg tried to point out his party's insanity in a debate already and lost, badly.

The greens on the other hand are freaking nuts. They don't have that same charisma, and a lot of their policies are massively outside mainstream left wing thought. I think shining a light on them in a debate will actually hurt their support and push it back to Labour, especially if Ed is doing okay as per above. The greens in the UK aren't at the stage they are in mainland Europe - they are still a radical protest party, and I think they will suffer for that when examined.
 

kmag

Member
Aug 27, 2012
7,154
0
0
I think the debates will go better for Labour than expected for a couple of reasons.

1) the bar has been set so low for Ed that as long as he doesn't foul himself on stage he will be seen to do well. In terms of expectation management, I cannot think of a time when someone has been viewed so negatively.

2) I think Cameron's plan re the Greens will backfire. I understand the theory behind it - use them to drain away Labours far left support in the same way UKIP drain away the Tories. However, the problem is that the Greens aren't UKIP. Farage has made a career out being a blokey, honest guy who says what a lot of people think and sounds rational like your mate down the pub. Clegg tried to point out his party's insanity in a debate already and lost, badly.

The greens on the other hand are freaking nuts. They don't have that same charisma, and a lot of their policies are massively outside mainstream left wing thought. I think shining a light on them in a debate will actually hurt their support and push it back to Labour, especially if Ed is doing okay as per above. The greens in the UK aren't at the stage they are in mainland Europe - they are still a radical protest party, and I think they will suffer for that when examined.

The bar has been set so low for Ed, he probably could soil himself on stage and get away with it as long as he doesn't pull the bacon sandwich face.

On setting the bar low. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/feb/15/iain-duncan-smith-tories-universal-credit

That's surely got to be ironic piss taking from the author, the IC is a shambles. One of my previous employers are one of the main contractors on it, it kinda just about works for single claimants without any dependants or complex needs but even then still requires lots of manual crosschecking if circumstances change. Full implementation is 6 years away, and it was 6 years away back when it was launched in 2011, so the project has slipped 4 years in 4 years.
 

tomtom94

Member
Sep 30, 2014
4,289
0
0
Labour will probably win the debates (including the head-to-head one) solely by virtue of being the opposition, but that will have to translate into Nick Clegg-esque gains for that to mean anything.

I think Cameron and the papers overestimated the chances of the Greens taking seats from Labour, to be quite honest - if it is going to happen it won't be this election. But as a move for diluting the TV debates and minimising the effect that each individual party will have on people's impressions of him, inviting them on is quite an effective move.

(Also, he can use the Greens to paint the entire British left-wing as crazy.)
 

Maledict

Member
Feb 16, 2013
8,779
1
600
That's why Ed should gun for the greens in the debate. He isn't going to convince right wing voters at this stage, he needs to stop his own party defecting so he guns for the far left - the SNP and the Greens. Present himself as a reasonable, grounded left wing candidate who can get things done and has the same moral compass as them, but grounded in reality.

Its a tall order, but is a way to thread the needle. He absolutely has to avoid agreeing with either the SNP or the greens.
 

JonathanEx

Member
Jan 5, 2006
13,636
0
0
England
www.jonathancresswell.co.uk
It's interesting how this mess goes. Tories stay quiet on HMRC/HSBC, Labour do interviews to try and get some gain on it, therefore Labour get questioned and criticised, pick up on one interview detail, everybody picks up on that and it becomes the story of the day, and people outside the bubble just get sick of everything involved.

I presume Ed Balls logic was 'if I say cash in hand there's fine, everyone will go oh see tax avoidance everyone does it stop making a fuss you hypocrites', forgetting the other hand of 'oh why do you hate everyone who works cash in hand trying to strangle british trademen god you prick'

Basically the best thing for Labour to do is nothing at all?

But basically I don't give a fuck what Ed Ball does with his bushes and who he pays to deal with it.
 

Nicktendo86

Member
Mar 24, 2009
7,497
206
1,100
35
London
Oh dear, Mr Balls

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31480231

Targeting the "cash in hand" demographic means a few thousand more Labour votes to UKIP. Top start of the week.
Miliband committed to the UK having lowest cop tax in g7 as well, not g20 leaving himself some wriggle room.
They are so anti business it is unreal.

Edit: Tories with four point lead on 'gold standard' ICM poll on 36%, just a point behind their GE2010 result. I think we will start to settle into a pattern like this the closer we get to the election and minds sharpen.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/feb/16/tories-up-six-points-latest-icm-opinion-poll