Brexit: The fallout

10,810 posts in this topic

Anger over Westminster security pass for Cummings

 

Quote

Senior MPs have demanded to know why Dominic Cummings, the prime minister’s adviser, has been granted a security pass for the Palace of Westminster even though he has been found in contempt of parliament.

 

The former head of the Vote Leave campaign, who is now employed inside No 10, was sanctioned in March this year for failing to appear before the digital, culture, media and sport committee’s inquiry into fake news. MPs on the Commons committee of privileges found that his refusal to give oral evidence constituted a significant interference in the work of the inquiry.

 

Damian Collins, chair of the media committee, said at that time that Cummings had shown a “total disregard” for the authority of parliament and called for statutory powers to “reassert the authority that is missing”.

 

Cummings, now employed as a special adviser to Boris Johnson, was seen in parliament several times last week as a cross-party group of MPs seized control of the parliamentary timetable. They tabled a bill to force Johnson to ask the EU for an extension to the Brexit deadline from 31 October to 31 January, if no agreement has been reached with Brussels by the middle of next month.

 

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Chris Marston said:

So are you buying the right-wing anti-Labour press propaganda?

 

Some background info on whose language you seem to adapt.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_Consent

Good morning.

 

Never heard of the book and I'm unlikely to read it. We are all influenced by what we read in the press and hear on the news but I don't buy or read any of the newspapers and when I'm unsure of something I do tend to try and cross reference with another source. The Left also have their mouthpieces as well.

 

As for Corbyn, I'm afraid the world has moved on and he hasn't.

People no longer want a truly social leaning government, they bought into Thatcher and Reagan in a big way and believed in the I want - I can have view. We can't renationalise everything that was previously in public ownership - it would cost too much and be deeply unpopular but I do believe that certain things such as Infrastucture, the Utilities, Public Transport, anything that can be used to hold the country to ransome should be in Public ownership. That goes for schools and  prisons as well. If a company can make a profit from a government contract then theoretically the government can provide the same level of service for less. Cost of contract minus profit made by contractor.

 

The UK is a Capitalist state. Everything in the country is based around private enterprise, work hard and progress. The UK is not as hard as the US that has taken capitalism to extreme with high levels of poverty mixed with extreme wealth and greed. We can't tax more, people won't stand for it. We can't have high levels of tax for business otherwise no one will invest in the UK so I'm afraid Corbyn's ideas are unworkable.

 

As for defence, he's showing great naivety if he thinks we can just scrap our nuclear deterrent and carry on as before. The world is becoming more unsafe and we need some form of insurance. I don't trust the US either. CND and Ban the Bomb movements have had their day.

 

So in my eyes Corbyn is out of date, his form of socialism does not reflect the modern world nor is it a good fit for the country he wants to govern. Just look at how Russia and China have turned out, both have turned their backs on true socialism - they were never really Marxist / Communist states, too corrupt to begin with.

4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/6/2019, 3:25:55, Wulfrun said:

I just hope the UK is still a member when the anti tax avoidance directive takes effect...

 

Didn't it already?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, French bean said:

We can't tax more, people won't stand for it. We can't have high levels of tax for business otherwise no one will invest in the UK

 

If people had more money, they could pay more tax.

 

How could they get more money? Hmmm.

 

Maybe if we reduced uni fees and promoted vocational training.

 

And made it hard to run big (super big) business, but financially easy to run small (or medium, employing lots of people who actually know each other) businesses.

 

Then why would we need so many outside "investors" to come and prop up our dodgy economy?

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, sos-the-rope said:

 

If people had more money, they could pay more tax.

 

How could they get more money? Hmmm.

 

Maybe if we reduced uni fees and promoted vocational training.

 

And made it hard to run big (super big) business, but financially easy to run small (or medium, employing lots of people who actually know each other) businesses.

 

Then why would we need so many outside "investors" to come and prop up our dodgy economy?

A very valid point. I was so pleased when the minimum wage came in because it meant increased Tax revenues and less subsidy for business. After all if they can't afford to pay people than their business model is flawed. Promote vocational training by all means but I'm not convinced with reducing tuition fees. After all those who benefit from a university education tend to get far better paid jobs so it's only fair they put something in to the system that will benefit them the most

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, sos-the-rope said:

Didn't it already?

 

ATAD I came into effect on 1st January this year, ATAD II, which involves '3rd countries', takes effect on 1st Jan. 2020, this is the bit that covers offshore 'tax havens', which is why the tories' greedy owners want to be out of the EU before that date, regardless of how much damage brexit will cause to the UK :angry:

5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just seem the press conferences between Varadkar and Johnson; I certainly get the impression that he is not for turning.

 

It will be interesting what comes of these "all Island solutions" that have been muted over the last few days; with the chaos in Parliament, is DUP support really that crucial now? If the general mood in Northern Ireland is that an NI-only backstop is an acceptable solution, perhaps that gives a deal that the rebel alliance and Labour brexiteers can just about get over the line without needing the DUP?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Wulfrun said:

 

ATAD I came into effect on 1st January this year, ATAD II, which involves '3rd countries', takes effect on 1st Jan. 2020, this is the bit that covers offshore 'tax havens', which is why the tories' greedy owners want to be out of the EU before that date, regardless of how much damage brexit will cause to the UK :angry:

 

Doubtless plenty of others want to keep things as they are too. Don't think the UK has a monopoly on this.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, French bean said:

Promote vocational training by all means but I'm not convinced with reducing tuition fees. After all those who benefit from a university education tend to get far better paid jobs so it's only fair they put something in to the system that will benefit them the most

 

If they later earn more, then they will put more into the system in taxes later too. But in any case, university educated people are vital to the economy. They are the doctors running our hospitals. The engineers building our bridges, roads and railways. They are the scientists advancing health and technology and propping up the entire economy. I really don't understand why higher education is not better funded.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, theGman said:

 

If they later earn more, then they will put more into the system in taxes later too. But in any case, university educated people are vital to the economy. They are the doctors running our hospitals. The engineers building our bridges, roads and railways. They are the scientists advancing health and technology and propping up the entire economy. I really don't understand why higher education is not better funded.

 

they also produces new tax advisors, so the rich can avoid the regulations

and

 

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, theGman said:

 

If they later earn more, then they will put more into the system in taxes later too. But in any case, university educated people are vital to the economy. They are the doctors running our hospitals. The engineers building our bridges, roads and railways. They are the scientists advancing health and technology and propping up the entire economy. I really don't understand why higher education is not better funded.

 

In the UK, it's to make an elite commodity, and reduce the amount of real economy to keep the labour market cheap too.

 

In a complex world, some kind of higher and/or further education is necessary for almost all businesses. By keeping the price of that education high, the UK can pick and choose "international talent" rather than allowing pesky communities in the UK itself to build up and actually have a say in how things are done.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, sos-the-rope said:

 

Doubtless plenty of others want to keep things as they are too. Don't think the UK has a monopoly on this.

So... how many others' countries are, suicidally, leaving the EU because of it?

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Wulfrun said:

So... how many others' countries are, suicidally, leaving the EU because of it?

 

Why would they need to when they can move to the tax haven in the UK?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone with a University education can earn far more in reality than someone without. What does a Doctor earn? Is it around 100k GBP or as a GP now. IT specialist? Accountant or lawyer? These guys tend to be on seriously good money, not mechanical engineers in the UK unfortunately because they are not particularly valued. These guys also tend to find out how to reduce their tax bills either through employment Tax loopholes or 'investments'. So yes higher education needs to be better funded but why can't those who benefit from the increased earning potential contribute to that funding. Extra funding does not mean more money going into the pockets of the Deans because THEY think they are worth it.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, sos-the-rope said:

 

Why would they need to when they can move to the tax haven in the UK?

:blink:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now