• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

General UK Politics VI It's A (Honey) Trap!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Planigale said:
How has Sunak's wife profited? Non-dom tax exemption was introduced in 1799. So not an act of the present government.
Click to expand...

Her company benefitted under the furlough scheme. Nobody said it was an Act of the current government. The problem is, whilst a cabinet minister has to declare their interests, their spouses do not. That is how Baroness Mone got away with her PPE scheme. Likewise, Sunak has 'written off' all of the PPE profits meaning it will never be investigated what has happened to the massive funds given to 'Dido' Harding for track and trace, or the funds given to contacts of Matt Hancock. Likewise, Sunak's firm Thelema registered in the Cayman Islands is known to have fund management in the USA of Moderna. None of this is transparent as Sunak has declared his business interests as 'blind'.

IMV more controls need to be put in place to stop cynical profiteering off the taxpayer's back. Likewise, suspected breaches of the ministerial code should be investigated by an independent body, not friends of the Prime Minister (such as Lord Geidt clearing Boris Johnson of all impropriety over wallpapergate and his 'donations' from fellow peer, Lord Bamford).
 
Last edited:
Farage actually owns 53% of Reform / UKIP but insists he’s not a politician and is a director but insists he has no legal responsibility.
Although he claims on the Companies House website that his occupation is "Leader of a Political Party".

So if Reform were elected to power, Britain would be governed by a Limited Liability Company, with it's Directors denying any responsibility.
 
Another resignation, this time it's the SNP, who need a new FM. An old FM is tipped for the job (no not her, don't be stupid!) (or that other one!).
 
Vixen said:
IMV more controls need to be put in place to stop cynical profiteering off the taxpayer's back. Likewise, suspected breaches of the ministerial code should be investigated by an independent body, not friends of the Prime Minister (such as Lord Geidt clearing Boris Johnson of all impropriety over wallpapergate and his 'donations' from fellow peer, Lord Bamford).
Click to expand...

There are controls in place to stop cynical profiteering. The PPE stuff happened during the pandemic when the government was panicking about getting supplies in and thus ignored the controls.

Normal NHS procurement processes were far too slow for a crisis like the pandemic. That doesn't make the corruption acceptable, of course, but we should remember the context in which it happened. Everything happened far too fast for proper cover up measures to be put in place.
 
Andy_Ross said:
Disabled people face being stripped of monthly payments and given vouchers instead under a benefits crackdown being unveiled on Monday ahead of the local elections.

The proposed changes to the Personal Independence Payment (PIP) will be announced as part of a wider welfare reforms drive, championed by Rishi Sunak, to tackle the UK’s worklessness crisis.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/04/28/disabled-people-benefits-clampdown-rishi-sunak/
Click to expand...

Nice. They worry that these payments have spiralled due to increasing cases of anxiety and depression, so the go-to solution is their usual style of performative cruelty so their voter base (does it still exist?) can see them shaking these workshy benefits scroungers out of their anxiety and depression. That'll fix it.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/...-launched-on-personal-independence-payment--2
 
Andy_Ross said:
Disabled people face being stripped of monthly payments and given vouchers instead under a benefits crackdown being unveiled on Monday ahead of the local elections.

The proposed changes to the Personal Independence Payment (PIP) will be announced as part of a wider welfare reforms drive, championed by Rishi Sunak, to tackle the UK’s worklessness crisis.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/04/28/disabled-people-benefits-clampdown-rishi-sunak/
Click to expand...

To be fair to the Tories this is only a short term cost cutting measure, the longer term savings will come as former recipients starve or kill themselves.
 
Even May got more done with her minority government. It is unbelievable given the majority over the last few years how little they have done. It truly is a staggering level of incompetence and a lack of any kind of vision apart from enriching them and theirs, directly and indirectly.
 
Andy_Ross said:
Disabled people face being stripped of monthly payments and given vouchers instead under a benefits crackdown being unveiled on Monday ahead of the local elections.

The proposed changes to the Personal Independence Payment (PIP) will be announced as part of a wider welfare reforms drive, championed by Rishi Sunak, to tackle the UK’s worklessness crisis.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/04/28/disabled-people-benefits-clampdown-rishi-sunak/
Click to expand...

It's basically smoke and mirrors, there is neither the time nor the will to get this through parliament before an election even if Sunak strings it out until the last minute. The real question is who does he think this policy will appeal to?
 
jeremyp said:
There are controls in place to stop cynical profiteering. The PPE stuff happened during the pandemic when the government was panicking about getting supplies in and thus ignored the controls.

Normal NHS procurement processes were far too slow for a crisis like the pandemic. That doesn't make the corruption acceptable, of course, but we should remember the context in which it happened. Everything happened far too fast for proper cover up measures to be put in place.
Click to expand...

It's a shame Baroness 'Dido' Harding didn't cancel Cheltenham with the same alacrity!

When the report comes out it will be interesting to see what the Inquiry says about that event and the number of deaths as a result thereof.
 
Andy_Ross said:
Farage actually owns 53% of Reform / UKIP but insists he’s not a politician and is a director but insists he has no legal responsibility.
Although he claims on the Companies House website that his occupation is "Leader of a Political Party".

So if Reform were elected to power, Britain would be governed by a Limited Liability Company, with it's Directors denying any responsibility.
Click to expand...

They can still be pursued as 'dodgy directors'. The Limited Liability just protects them from personal debt. BUT if crime is involved ill-gotten gains can be confiscated under the Proceeds of Crime Act.

But hey, don't stop them just yet. :D
 
Architect said:
On the contrary, the decision to end the BHA was understandable given the imminent Green vote and Harvie's refusal to compromise on legislation such as Heat in Buildings which was proving widely unpopular. I think it was unwise, but it wasn't the bolt from the blue you suggest.



YouGov polling has ScotLab only slightly ahead, which would mean that they too would have to form a coalition - but with him? Are they willing to get into bed with the Tories? The Greens claim to be pro Independence so that's presumably out.


It's very fluid situation. I think the First Minister will be gone imminently and the replacement will pour, or attempt to pour, oil on troubled waters.
Click to expand...

The EGM by the S Greens was four weeks in the future (a very long time in politics) with no certainty hat the EGM would end the coalition if suitable offers are made.

Just poor judgement by Yusuf (as much else).
 
Gulliver Foyle said:
I see Rish! doesn't want to do a deal with Ireland over UK asylum seekers crossing the border.

Brilliant strategy that, annoying the one country in your largest trading partner and biggest source of foodstuffs who has a vested interest in being friendly with you.
Click to expand...

The EU has said that 'deals' have to be made with the EU not individual members so the UK is just sticking to the post Brexit rules specified by the EU.

For a party that represents 'rural Britain' alienating 'the biggest source of foodstuffs' external to the UK may not be bad politics?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom