Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Brown gambles on £120 tax giveaway to woo back voters

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 14 May 2008
EVERY basic-rate taxpayer is to receive a £120 boost in a panic Budget measure unveiled by the government yesterday, as Gordon Brown sought to salvage his battered reputation with a massive £2.7 billion economic gamble.

The measure is designed to compensate victims of Mr Brown's decision to scrap the 10p lower tax bracket and so avert a mutiny of Labour MPs.

However, 1.1 million low- income households will still be worse off this year, gaining less from the ta
x break than they will lose from the ending of the 10p rate.

The level at which the higher 40p tax rate is paid will also be reduced, so higher earners will not gain from the change.

The government will have to borrow £2.7 billion to fund the tax change – endangering Mr Brown's own fiscal rules on debt being no more than 40 per cent of national income.

Pumping extra money into the economy is also set to raise inflation still further, after monthly figures released yesterday showed the fastest surge in the cost of living for six years, of half a percentage point, taking inflation to 3 per cent.

Labour MPs, who have been met with hostility from constituents over the abolition of the 10p rate – even from those who were not affected by the changes – were initially supportive of the move.

Frank Field, a former welfare minister who led a 50-strong back-bench rebellion, apologised for his personal attacks on the Prime Minister after witnessing the U-turn.

However, the Conservatives attacked what they called a "compensation con" and said it would still cost those earning between £6,635 and £13,355 up to £112 a year.

Announcing the changes, Alistair Darling, the Chancellor, said they were the "fairest and most effective way" to help those on low pay who had been set to suffer.

"At a cost of £2.7 billion, I will increase the individual personal tax allowance by £600 to £6,035 for this financial year, benefiting all basic-rate taxpayers under 65," he said.

"This will mean 22 million people on low and middle incomes will gain an additional £120 this year."

The changes will be backdated to the start of the financial year in April and come into force in September. That means basic-rate taxpayers will get an extra £60 in September and £10 a month thereafter.

Some 4.2 million middle-income households will receive at least the amount they originally lost. But 1.1 million households – those who were in the top half of the former 10p rate – will still miss out, by up to half the original amount.

Mr Darling also announced the threshold for the higher 40p rate of tax would be reduced by £600, cancelling out the £120 gain for those earning more than £40,835.

The changes have also been guaranteed for only one year, giving the government wriggle room if finances get even tighter.

Political opponents described the move as a cynical ploy to avert disaster in next week's Crewe and Nantwich by-election, which follows the death of Labour MP Gwyneth Dunwoody.

George Osborne, the shadow Chancellor, said: "This is a panic Budget from a divided, dithering and disintegrating government that has completely lost control of events.

"We support any help to compensate those hit by the government's tax increases on the low paid. But this is a one-off, one-year-only payment which could be reversed by a tax increase next year.

"They haven't addressed the root cause of the problem. They've followed the tax con with a compensation con."

He later said Scots would be worse off as they tended to be lower earners.

Vincent Cable, the Liberal Democrats' economic spokesman, told the Chancellor his changes might "for a few hours, get you out of the difficulties you created for yourself", adding: "I hope this is not just another short-term gimmick, but the beginning of a process by which the low-paid pay less tax."

Yesterday's changes are believed to have averted a rebellion by Labour MPs who were preparing to scupper the Finance Bill and force a reversal of the 10p tax abolition.

After Mr Darling's announcement, Mr Field apologised "without reservation" to the Prime Minister for allowing his campaign over the scrapping of the 10p rate to "become personal".

Mr Field infuriated Cabinet ministers at the weekend by saying he would be "very surprised" if Mr Brown lasted another two years in No10. He claimed the Prime Minister was visibly unhappy in his position, branding it a "tragedy". He has also held out the prospect of a Commons defeat for the government over the Budget without further reassurances on tax reforms.

Despite the approval of Labour back-benchers, the upping of personal tax allowances may not be enough to save Labour from defeat in the Crewe and Nantwich by-election. Tories are privately hopeful of overturning Labour's 7,000 majority, and

the bookmaker William Hill agrees with them. It has further slashed the odds of the Conservatives winning the seat from 1/6 to 1/8.

Mr Darling's major announcement on income tax changes between Budgets is without precedent in modern British history.

Jonathan Loynes, chief economist at Capital Economics, said the move was a "pretty crude response" and risked breaching the government's fiscal rule of sustainable investment, which states net debt should not be more than 40 per cent of GDP.

And despite the government's intention of helping ordinary families, other experts warned boosting the amount of money in the economy could force inflation up.

Nice try – but quick fixes won't help

THE Chancellor, Alastair Darling, has announced that personal tax allowances will be raised by £600, backdated to April (the start of the fiscal year), at a cost of £2.7 billion.

Note that higher-rate taxpayers will not benefit, because the threshold at which an individual starts to pay higher-rate tax will be reduced by £600.

According to the Chancellor, this measure will fully compensate 80 per cent of those mainly low-income earners who lost out when the 10p tax rate was scrapped in Gordon Brown's last Budget in 2007.

The remaining 20 per cent of people will, on average, recoup half their losses. Other basic-rate taxpayers will benefit as well.

According to the Chancellor, the measure will "help all basic-rate taxpaying families at a time when oil and food prices have been rising in every part of the world… this family tax cut provides support this year for those on middle incomes at a time where they face increased bills, so supporting the economy".

The cost of this measure will be covered by higher government borrowing.

The timing of this announcement has clearly been brought forward to try to prop up the Labour vote in next week's by-election in Crewe and Nantwich in Cheshire.

Recent polls have suggested that Labour will lose this vote, in what normally has been a safe Labour seat. Such a by-election defeat would put further pressure on Mr Brown.

In our view, the announcement tends to confirm fears that, faced with the slowing economy and sliding opinion polls, the government will let the fiscal deficit rise further.

The UK already has the highest structural fiscal deficit among major European countries, and it is likely to rise above 3 per cent of gross domestic product this year.

The government might argue that this fiscal stimulus will give help to the economy in difficult times. The Bank of England's monetary policy committee (MPC) is unlikely to be grateful.

We do not regard any such stimulus as very significant. The bigger worry is that fiscal slippage will reinforce the MPC's worries about the rise in inflation expectations and possible slippage away from stability-oriented policies.

Faced with the difficult economic challenges of the credit crunch and rising inflation, it is all too tempting to look for "quick fixes" that can somehow avoid the need for UK consumers, businesses and fiscal policymakers to adjust to changed (and tougher) economic circumstances.

We doubt any such sustainable fix truly exists. The rise in global commodity prices implies a loss of real incomes for UK consumers, and this cannot be ducked. This is a message that the MPC will be keen to stress.

• Michael Saunders is the chief UK economist at Citi European Economics.

Downing St transparency signals 10% housing slump

CONFIDENTIAL government papers exposing the true scale of the housing crisis were accidentally made public yesterday by a minister's blunder.

Caroline Flint, the housing minister, walked into Downing Street on her way to brief the Cabinet with a transparent file of papers revealing prices were expected to fall by up to 10 per cent this year, knocking £20,000 off the value of the average house.

Photographers were able to zoom in on the text – and the frank admission that "at best" prices are set to fall by 5 to 10 per cent.

There was an admission that "we can't know how bad it will get" – and a note that Ms Flint should remind her colleagues that the government was "on people's side."

The document pointed out that leading house-price indicators were predicting reductions for the first time in recent years. The figures are likely to relate only to England and Wales as housing is devolved to the Scottish Government.

Ms Flint also expressed concerns over housebuilding – indicating that the government could struggle to hit its target of building three million new homes by 2020.

Grant Shapps, the Tory shadow housing minister, said: "Rather than closed-door briefings to Cabinet, Caroline Flint must come out in public and make a full statement about what she thinks the future might be for hard-pressed home-owners."

Ms Flint accepted that she had been "caught out" but insisted that her briefing note contained only information that was already public.

Price-rise figures mask true hardship for families

IN THE past week I have had several disconcerting experiences while shopping. In each case, the cost of the goods was higher than the ample cash I had ready to offer. It is not that everyday life has moved to a new price level. It is moving to a higher level with almost every week.

We are now told that inflation on the official measure has "surged" to 3 per cent. Surge it may well have done. But there is not a household in the land that believes the rate of inflation to be this low. Everyday "real" inflation – the price of essentials such as fuel, fares and food – is rising by far more than the "official" 3 per cent.

Even the headline Retail Price Index rate, now at 4.2 per cent, fails to capture the scale of price rises households are now facing for basic necessities.

Food price inflation jumped to 7.2 per cent year-on-year last month. Dairy products – eggs, cheese and milk – are up 15.7 per cent. Electricity is up 8.3 per cent. Postal services are up by 6.7 per cent. Petrol is up almost 19 per cent.

Food inflation bears down all the harder on low-income families, as food accounts for a larger share of their weekly spending. Little wonder that the inflation rate facing people aged over 75 is reckoned to be 37 per cent higher than the official one.

All this is bad enough. But there is much worse in the pipeline. Latest figures on wholesale prices will have set off alarm bells at No 10 Downing Street and the Treasury. They show the prices of goods leaving the factory gate rising by 7.5 per cent year-on-year, while the cost of fuel and raw materials bought by industry is now surging at a staggering annual rate of more than 23 per cent.

Both output and input prices are rising at the fastest rate since the index started in 1986. Global price increases are being magnified here by the 12 per cent fall in sterling over the past year.

The problem with cost increases of this ferocity is that they have far wider effects. Consumers have less to spend on other items. Companies face a relentless squeeze on margins and profits. As if on cue, Scottish dairy giant Robert Wiseman, caught between the giant supermarkets and the soaring cost of raw materials, announced this week that its profits could take an £8.5 million hit. Its shares plunged.

It will be far from alone. Companies will be forced to cut costs and lay off staff. Businesses lose the confidence to invest. Tax revenues fall. And the government becomes increasingly unpopular and vulnerable to events.

It takes between three and six months for these increases to work through to retail prices in the high street. So unless there is a truly dramatic collapse in the oil and commodities markets, we are faced with further price rises in the autumn and winter.

So much for higher inflation being a short-lived "spike" that would not stand in the way of interest rate cuts. The Bank of England is now truly snookered. It cannot cut with credibility when the governor, Mervyn King, may soon be obliged to write a letter to the Chancellor explaining why inflation is way above the target level.

Bill Jamieson

'Horrible surprise' as inflation rate soars

A SHOCK spike in the cost of living during April hit hopes for interest rate cuts yesterday, as inflation soared at its highest pace for nearly six years.

The official Consumer Prices Index (CPI) benchmark of inflation jumped 0.5 per cent to 3 per cent – shattering City forecasts with its biggest monthly rise since July 2002.

The impact of surging gas and electricity bills, rising food prices and Budget tax hikes on alcohol and tobacco means Bank of England governor Mervyn King is on the brink of having to write his second letter to the Chancellor to explain the rise.

The Bank is charged with keeping CPI within 1 per cent of its 2 per cent target but Mr King will have to explain himself publicly if inflation moves any higher – as now seems certain. CPI last hit 3.1 per cent in March 2007.

Economists had been pencilling in a rate cut to 4.75 per cent from the Bank's monetary policy committee to help a slowing economy and ease pressure on borrowers next month, but yesterday's unexpected figures throw that into doubt.

Howard Archer, chief UK economist with research firm Global Insight, called the data "another horrible surprise on the inflation front" after figures on Monday showed factory-gate prices were rising at their fastest rate since records began more than 20 years ago.

"The chances of a June interest rate cut are rapidly diminishing," Mr Archer said.

The downbeat view was reflected in London's FTSE 100 index, which fell more than 1 per cent following the figures.

Other experts warned inflation could remain at elevated levels for months, as households braced themselves for another round of energy price hikes after heavy hints from British Gas parent company Centrica on Monday.

Russell Lynch











The full article contains 2539 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

 
1

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 14/05/2008 00:08:56

£140.00!,...'Yer Havvin a Laugh'!
2

Senga Jean,

14/05/2008 00:10:00
Labour are beyond belief. This botched,hamfisted political bribe is just not the prudent way to use public funds. The poor are still losing out and the relatively well off are getting a nice little bonus. Like Wendy Alexander this is policy on the hoof written on the back of an envelope. Scotland deserves better. The world deserves better.
3

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 14/05/2008 00:15:41

I wanna know, are you true?
Can you Woo Woo Woo Woo?
They don't thug it like I do
Can you Woo Woo Woo Woo?
4

Marky Bhoy,

Donfermline 14/05/2008 00:42:46
I grovel before your Generousity Mr Darling

Now F$$k off and let the real finance mimister John Swinney tske care of things
5

Guga II,

Rockall 14/05/2008 01:47:22
I very much doubt if Maggie Broon can buy himself a by-election for £140; especially when inflation, real inflation that is, not the lying statistics provided by the government, is around 15% to 18% at the moment, and rising.

It's also only a matter of time before there are a series of strikes all over the country for higher pay to compensate for this surging inflation.

Maggie Broon will also try to compensate his government for his £140 giveaway by finding some other form of indirect or stealth tax to impose on people.

The New Labour Sleaze and Corruption Party are ensuring that when the Tories hammer them at the next general election, they will be in power for a generation.
6

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 14/05/2008 02:04:17
Oops! "£120 tax giveaway" not £140.00!

Well whats the difference,?

£20Squid! :-))
7

Mr A Roy,

14/05/2008 02:43:37
The only boost i need is for comrade broon to call an election
8

Guga II,

Rockall 14/05/2008 03:40:11
#6 Sorry Charles, slight typo there. The difference being about 14 litres of petrol, at the moment.
9

Jeeemy,

St Andrews 14/05/2008 04:14:38
Guga II,
Rockall 14/05/2008 03:40:11
#6 Sorry Charles, slight typo there. The difference being about 14 litres of petrol, at the moment.

You nearly had it there, what seems to have been missed by all is the fact that Brown is only giving away the extra vat he is receiving from the retail price of petrol.
The fact that the “Great Give Away” equates to 14 litres of petrol over a year means absolutely nothing.
The other “Give Away” the heating allowance where does £250.00 go when spread over 365 days?
No we do have a great need for open and transparent government, there is no place left in Scotland for the political liars and their publishing houses.
10

Navvy,

14/05/2008 05:28:22
Bribery and corruption - how many will buy it?

Brown was never a good Chancellor just a lucky one and now that there is skill needed he has fallen flat on his face
11

Richardinho,

14/05/2008 05:36:37
Just restore the 10p rate-People don't want to be benefit claimants, they want to pay their taxes honestly and not be burdened by tax rises.
12

Pilrig.,

Livingston 14/05/2008 05:44:47
£140,wow, that's going to go far when food and fuel prices are rocketing.
13

Stuart F.,

Burnaby, Canada 14/05/2008 05:49:03
Don't be fooled by this so-called tax relief. They get it back some way or another. Maybe a wee bit more on the petrol, or an enviromental levy. This is a desperate measures attempt for Broon to save his own behind.
14

Scotindy,

Los Angeles 14/05/2008 06:11:51
Why should any one commpensate for the BANKER ******* UP YOUR ACCOUNT!!!!!!
15

Ron Thomson,

calonge 14/05/2008 06:31:05
Gordon Brown, agenda
I love the Voters,
I help the Voters,
I am a slave to the Voters.
BUT.
Just wait till i get in again, my new Agenda.
I will F@#K the Voters just you wait and see.
No more Mr Nice Guy.
16

A Better Way,

Edinburgh 14/05/2008 06:37:48
So Gordon is a moron and his halfwit silver spooned Darling are going to ignore the needs of the majority of low paid Scots, to give the English more. A pair of lowlifes indeed.

So what he is saying is that lowpaid Scots dont really matter. In years gone by before Labour used to be able to call themselves "Socialists" who tried to at least help the very people they have now cut adrift because they cant fight back.

The right wing "New Labour" with their massive expenses and perks are telling the hardworking low paid they dont really count. Thats one and a half million people who do the crappiest of jobs for little or no thanks, being exploited by a neo fascist big business party. What has gone wrong with our society, and its reputation as being fair minded with at least some compassion for the disadvantaged. 4.8 trillion quid in ten years they spent, leaving the different countries people in debt up to and including their necks in massive debt. Inflation running at least just below 20%, not the doctored figures we are fed with. We all know how tough things are getting, yet not one New Labour MP will retire without a great pension scheme or as in the case of Tony Blair a 30 million property port folio. Now exactly how do you go from being paid a nice salary for less than TEN YEARS, to being on the RICH LIST. We cant do it. ITS OUR COUNTRY AND ITS OUR OIL THEY ARE STEALING FROM THE SCOTTISH PEOPLE TO FUND THE WASTE AND THE HUGE FINANCIAL BENEFITS WE CAN ONLY DREAM OF.
17

Richard Taylor,

Aberdeen 14/05/2008 06:54:20
Labour - from the gutter to the sewer.

2010 can't come soon enough.
18

FedUpTaxPayer,

Edinburgh 14/05/2008 06:54:29
You couldn't make up just how bad this government is.

Economic policy - I believe the general idea is you're meant to plan and think things through, not make it up as you go along in order to bribe voters in a by-election.

Still, it's about the first cut that this taxing and squandering government have given us.

Labour are a total joke. Can we have an election now please.
19

Evan Owen,

Snowdonia 14/05/2008 07:10:15
Labour, schmabour, they are all a bunch of idiots whatever coulour rosette they have nailed to their hardwood foreheads, do you forget John Major already?
20

Boy Wonder,

14/05/2008 07:18:46
£120 is a drop in the ocean! And they know it! :(
21

Itchy,

14/05/2008 07:20:55
In what way is this a 'giveaway'?

Whose money is it, if not ours?
22

Itchy,

14/05/2008 07:22:00
#16 Brown and Darling are socialists. That is the cause of this problem
23

Saoghal Beag,

14/05/2008 07:32:13
stuart F, they already have taken that 120 from us in tax, but it won't stop them taking it again.
24

Buckfastleigh,

Looe 14/05/2008 07:34:18
A disgraceful and unworthy and petty insult to those who continue to see their tax for low wages used to boost (by a piddling amount) all standard rate tax payers.

They panicked and end up compensating with two tankfuls of petrol the rest of us!

Why did they not just pay the by-election voters and so hope the Liberal Democrats don't gain the seat on Thursday?
25

Phil C,

14/05/2008 07:34:43
That's a good idea by those brilliant minds in the heads of Brown and Darling. Wait till we're about bankrupt, then borrow a bit more to buy some sweeties for everyone! You couldn't make it up.
26

SouthernSkye,

Im Sonnen in Bonn 14/05/2008 07:38:53
And how much will this total hash cost to administer?
I have never been so amazed at the stupidity of HMG.
The tax bands were administered via the "normal"IRS channels.Now it all needs to be changed (to accomodate the change in tax banding).
Brown is a fly-by-night using slight of hand to try to confuse people. He introduced the incentive in corporation tax in order people would shift from self-emp. and start up Ltd companies. Once people had done this (to take avantage of the rules Mr. Brown introduced), he removed it saying it was a tax loop-hole. The current Treasury donkey is no better, I think he's just a puppet whose strings are pulled by the PM !
27

Phil C,

14/05/2008 07:42:12
These boards seem to confirm that Labour voters don't go online and maybe don't read papers or watch the news. There is rarely anything said in support of their policy and yet the polls show they are still supported by 1 in 3 people in Scotland! Are these voters made up, Mugabe style, and stuffed into the system? How else would Wendy and her bendy pals make it in politics?
28

Ubi,

Edinburgh 14/05/2008 07:44:42
We might prudently await the full details of the adjustment to the 40% rate before passing judgement on this sleight of hand. In the fullness of time - when the by-election is safely past, say - we may well learn that much more than £120 is clawed back from higher rate tax payers. Effectively financing the whole mess for the government and spun as redistributive policy from a Labour government.
29

,

14/05/2008 07:44:54
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
30

,

14/05/2008 07:54:50
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
31

,

14/05/2008 07:56:44
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
32

i a n,

Edinburgh 14/05/2008 08:10:00
In his speech, Alistair Darling said his "proposal for this year will not only help those on low incomes who lost out, but also does more to help all basic rate taxpaying families at a time when oil and food prices have been rising in every part of the world".

All basic rate taxpayers will receive the same amount of £120. Low earners will receive it to compensate for their loss as a result of the removal of the 10p tax band. The others are to be compensated for oil and food increases.

Are those on low incomes are not affected by the oil and food increases as well?
33

Buckfastleigh,

14/05/2008 08:16:20
35# how right you are (except for the quaint looking £sd figure*): "the point all of the journos have 'missed' is that anyone on the national normal wage (NMG) will still be at least £112 per year worse off at tax free allowance of £6,035 per annum equates to an hourly rate of *£2.97.6p. a wee bit below the National Normal Wage"

I suppose that Alisdaire Darling's only concern (other than sounding ridiculous in his concern for the affected lower pay) is to get his PM out of a political hole of his own making.

This one will run and run...
34

unbiased,

Erehwon o Elddim 14/05/2008 08:16:59
I will still be about £150 worse off per month - ok I will get my fuel allowance for the first time this year, but I have just had a minimum delivery of oil at £534!, this will last me about 7 months!
35

BIG EYE,

Paisley 14/05/2008 08:19:51
So Darling enters with the shotgun at his side. The gun goes off and pound notes are shot all over the country.

The ammunition was borrowed of course,only a little of it hit the real targets, billions were shot and lost unnecessarily and EVERYONE gets the chance to buy this mug more ammunition to waste when he next gets into trouble.

Labour Government don't you just luv it?
36

Claire22,

14/05/2008 08:21:47
#16 "ITS OUR COUNTRY AND ITS OUR OIL..."

No, that might be what Salmond would like us to think, but he of all people should know. It is the UK's oil and it is not at all certain that Scotland would get all of the oil revenue on independence.
37

BIG EYE,

Paisley 14/05/2008 08:22:19
The above is written in Wendy style so I hope this great intellect understands.
38

tommy,

belfast uk 14/05/2008 08:22:31
whatever happened to honest,principled politicians.
If there was no welfare system these guys would have been out on their asses long ago-- and that includes the present conservatives
39

thinking,

Scotland 14/05/2008 08:28:19
A repetition of the last Labour Government.
They left the Country's finances in a terrible mess, deeply in debt.
Maggie Thatcher turned things around (like any belt tightening, it wasn't liked)and left the country in good financial order. Labour tried to say that wasn't the case, but with freedom of information finally had to admit that they did inherit a healthy financial situation.
Gordon Brown has sytematically destroyed all that was achieved and we are worse off than ever, especially as he got rid of most of our gold reserves at rock bottom prices.
40

jdships,

14/05/2008 08:32:23

Are the goverment not just returning momey we have given them ?
The poor are still losing out and the relatively well off are getting a nice little bonus.
Why can't they just restore the 10p rate ?

Won't make one whit of difference when the vote's are being counted

38 i a n,Edinburgh
You sum things up very well !!
41

hibbyspurs,

Better off again 14/05/2008 08:45:18
What a joke....

The government robs the poorest paid by tking away the 10p tax band and then tries to make up for it by giving every working person an extra tax allowance.....

Thanks a lot, I benifited from the abolishment of the 10p tax band (doesnt mean I agree with it though), now I'll benifit a little more from this...

Shame that everthing else is making me suffer like inflation, fuel & energy costs, poor public services...

Nice try Labour but I still wont be voting for you come 2010......

Neither will the voters in the Nantwhich by-ellection either, you wont have to wait long to find out that your "gamble/ bribe" has failed miserably at least.

One other question, with all these people getting a wee tax break... Where exctly is the money coming from to fund it in the long term? Out of the NHS budget? The education budget? The police bidget? More tx on road fuel? An increase in VAT perhaps?

Never mind though as you full well know Mr Brown & Mr Darling that wont be your problem come May 2010 will it? I just hope that Mr Cameron and Co. have a slightly better grasp of economics than you do (that wouldnt be hard however going on current performance).
42

Fairfax,

14/05/2008 08:48:13
jdships (47): "Are the goverment not just returning momey we have given them ?"

Sadly no: they've already spent or allocated that. Hence the need to raise further money by more bonds.

"Why can't they just restore the 10p rate ?"

To do that would arguably be resignation for Brown and Darling. The Prime Minister's formal title is "First Lord of the Treasury", so being forced to fundamentally alter financial policy for the year would be the end of the line.
43

Fairfax,

14/05/2008 08:51:04
48: "Where exctly is the money coming from to fund it in the long term?"

It's being funded by debt rather than income: the Bank of England will issue bonds. In other words, taxpayers' future income will pay for this.
44

capy,

edinburgh 14/05/2008 08:53:54
well well just a couple of weeks after stating that the budget could not be revisited, mr darling has had a change of heart. nothing to do with the crewe by election.that would would be far to cynical.
i agree with #47 why not just restore the 10p rate. they wont because this is a one year only quick fix. i have yet to hear a labour party spokesperson on the tv or radio give an undertaking that it is for the long tearm. the tax system needs a radical overhaul. take the low paid out the system altogether rather than having to jump through hopes to get tax credits etc.
anyway this debacle along with wendys problems makes for highly entertaing watching. bring it on!!oops
45

acanthus,

14/05/2008 09:01:15
50: Fairfax,

Economists have already stated that the money will be offset against the rise in oil prices and like you say bonds.

The government is just not in a position at the moment to start borrowing especially to patch over another Labour u-turn.

Absolute disgrace and i hope the voters of Crewe slaughter them at the by-election!
46

Ctinj,

Alloa 14/05/2008 09:12:40
£120 bribe to vote Labour. Sorry but if you want me to vote Labour my price is a hell of a lot more than £120.
47

Sile,

14/05/2008 09:17:59
A Better Way 16#

What a shame when did you have the accident? and was there any need for them to stitch up your mouth, well I presume thats what happened as you are speaking through your anul tube..

Try living on the verge of London matey on a state pension while people I cannot even vote for impose costs on us that you don't pay for in your country, wow how bitter and twisted are you? bet your just over 5 ft tall
48

Fairfax,

14/05/2008 09:22:09
acanthus (52): "The government is just not in a position at the moment to start borrowing"

Not so: bonds are borrowing. The buyer of a bond is providing a sum of money in return for fixed income return. Essentially all English (UK from 1707) government borrowing has been via bonds since the foundation of the Bank of England in 1694.
49

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 14/05/2008 09:28:51

Why the sudden, 'Picture change',?

The..'Young Lady' was Soo much better!

Better than this,..'U*** Mugshot'!
50

hertscot,

14/05/2008 09:29:27
Listen Labour, do what you know is right.................TAX THE RICH!!
51

Iain's,

14/05/2008 09:38:07
Thisjust proves another New Labour lie.

They obviously do not know how to run the economy.

What happens next year? Do the poor pay until they squeal?

New Labour is the party of the corrupt and the rich. There is no socialist party in the UK anymore.

52

Alan Reid,

NZ 14/05/2008 09:40:52
Doesn't Brown realise that, the fact that he's Scottish means there is no way a vast number of the English will vote for him. The English are bigoted, that’s the way it is, and that’s why Scotland should go in its own way, England does not care about Scotland, so let’s have a government that does care about Scotland. We know the SNP are fighting for Scotland, as apposed to Brown who will say anything to keep in power.
53

Fairfax,

14/05/2008 09:42:58
acanthus (52): "The government is just not in a position at the moment to start borrowing"

I'm sorry -- it's obvious you already know what bonds are. Apologies for my last post: our government is affecting my ability to undertake rational thought. . .
54

Alan Reid,

NZ 14/05/2008 09:44:43
AM, I don't care how much the average Scot earns. The fact is Scotland is not allowed to run it's own affairs, and thats WRONG.
55

frank mcbride,

lusitania 14/05/2008 09:53:22
This Budget (2007) Amendment is another NuLab PFI/PPP initiative. It is a hidden debt that the people will have to pay.

Furthermore, there are still 1 100 000 income earners who will lose out.
This amendment benefits, most, those who already benefit from the tax change; those earning more than £18 000.

This is not only a sop to NuLab backbenchers, it is a cynical bribe to the voters of Crewe & Nantwich.
56

Liz,

Edinburgh 14/05/2008 10:00:10
#62
No, the English are not going to vote for Mr Brown because he is chuffing useless - it is nothing to do with his nationality.
After all Tony Blair was born and educated in Scotland and that didnt bother them at all. Yes I think I will repeat that; Tony Blair was Born and Educated in Scotland, many might describe him as Scottish.
57

frank mcbride,

lusitania 14/05/2008 10:15:40
#65, AM2.

You are right, Alan Reid's comment is objectionable.

But yet again, I see that you have little of relevance to say on the topic, other than to provide your cut & paste statistics to justify your diversionary tactic from the subject under debate.

The purchasing power of 1 100 000 has been severely diminished by this amendment. It matters not one whit where they live.

Westminster further impoverishes the poorest earners in society and leads more indviduals and "hard working" families in the Means Test.
Holyrood, on the other hand, is attempting, through LIT, to redistribute from rich to poor thus ensuring that the poor's purchasing power is enhanced.

Union Dividend:

Redistribution of wealth from poor to rich.
More Means Testing
Highest Government debt in history.
Highest personal debt in history.
Highest personal taxation, except for the super-rich, in history.
Further debt legacy of PFI/PPP.

It will be interesting to see your cut & paste reply.
58

AlecJ,

Aberdeen 14/05/2008 10:32:20
Behold, I promise -- Anything You will.
Behold, I greet you with an empty Till --
Ah! Fellow-Sinners, of your Charity
Seek not the Reason of the Dearth, but fill.

For if I sinned and fell, where lies the Gain
Of Knowledge? Would it ease you of your Pain
To know the tangled Threads of Revenue,
I ravel deeper in a hopeless Skein?

"Who hath not Prudence" -- what was it I said,
Of Her who paints her Eyes and tires Her Head,
And gibes and mocks and People in the Street,
And fawns upon them for Her thriftless Bread?

Accursed is She of Eve's daughters -- She
Hath cast off Prudence, and Her End shall be
Destruction . . . Brethren, of your Bounty
Some portion of your daily Bread to Me.

Kipling, of course, "The rupaiyat of Omar Kal'Vin" last four verses. amazing how his poetry is so up-to-date even though he died 72 years ago.

Verily, verily,
The Items of Receipt grow surely small;
The Items of Expense mount one by one.
59

oder,

SCOTLAND 14/05/2008 10:36:26
42 Claire22,14/05/2008 08:21:47
dont worry to much about oil! many people think ( in England and some unionists in Scotland) that the Snp case for independence will be made or broke on oil is wrong, for the future England`s problem is water not oil
only yesterday the city of Barcelona in Spain had to import water, it while require 200 hundred ship loads this year! Scotland holds more water than England and Wales put together! Scotlands future is bright! Scotlands future is water! where will England import from?
60

HughB,

Edinburgh 14/05/2008 10:38:48
This is not a tax giveaway, this is a tax giveback, and for THIS YEAR ONLY.

They took money from the people who could least afford it, especially at this time when Labour have manufactured high house prices, high fuel prices, high everything in fact, except Labour poll ratings.

This is in no way compensation. What's the point in punishing the poorest, then giving them a small token back for one year, when we all know that things are going to be even worse next year.

What a joke. Taking money from people, and then giving them a small amount back, and pretending this is supposed to make people pleased.
61

Ken S.,

Reading 14/05/2008 11:07:24
#70 Scottish and proud,

" there's a lot of Scots in high levels of Government and the English don't like it.

Slight modification: There's an undue proportion of Ministers elected in Scottish Constituencies deciding on English affairs that, in Scotland, are the responsibility of Holyrood... and the English don't like it.(I haven't asked any Scots-born folk living in England and therefore subject to the same disadvantages as to whether they like it either)

"..They also can't stomach the fact that we've got a competent government up here capable of giving us Scots the best deal they can.."

Envy, dear heart, envy. Why did you export second-rate produce and keep the best for yourselves ;-)

62

Union is Best,

14/05/2008 11:17:45
65. AM2. Nice one! But how should I explain this quote from the Herald from an advisor of Wendy Alexander referring to Brown/ Westminster - "they don't give a f**k about Scotland"?

If even senior Labour politicos say this, we are in trouble!
63

Alan Reid,

NZ 14/05/2008 11:36:36
AM, nice try, well actually it was pathetic really. You know as well as anyone else reading this post, that many English would not vote for Brown because he’s Scottish, and that went for Neil Kinnock as well.
Did you hear that English gentleman saying on the news that he didn’t want a Scottish Prime Minister!!! So English ok, Jocks Taffs, and Paddy’s, no way!!

So we’ve had three hundred years of English domination, but the minute the Scots get a TINY bit of self government, it’s get the “Sweaties “ out of Westminster.

A hell of a lot of English ARE bigoted,and thats a fact, as for the Scots well, they're the same.

However the amount of times I’ve sat with English people in pubs, and they’re going on and on, how f@cked England is because of all these immigrants coming in the country!
I find it quite funny that when I say out that I’m a Scottish nationalist, and point out that maybe all these Muslims coming into England are only getting their own back after England went into their country uninvited and f@cked it up!!! Unsurprisingly the conversation tends to dry up after that!!!

But please don’t try and paint me as some kind of anti English bigot, I’m not, as I’ve said many times before, I have no problem with the English, but I do have a problem with English MP’s who have no thought about the damage they do to my country.

Liz: you know well enough that Blair had a English Mother and a Irish Father, or was it the other way around? Anyway, Blair ALWAYS played down where he was born, because he knew if he was viewed as Scottish, middle England would never had voted for him.
64

Liz,

Edinburgh 14/05/2008 11:39:43
#74
Yes, quite right, there is no water in the whole of England in fact they are all dehydrating as I type this. Poor souls. They are within months of crawling to Scotland to ask for a bottle or two of Highland Spring to give to their dying children.

Stop writing such garbage. If anything it is a small area in the South of England that might run out and if so it will be an awful lot easier to get the water from the French (as they already buy power) than to transport it all the way from Scotland.
65

Alan B,

14/05/2008 11:43:56
I thought it was funny when newsnight a while ago (before brown became pm) got a bunch of people together in england and asked them who they though should replace blair as the new leader of the labour party and prime minister. They said no to brown with many saying it was because he was scottish. But then chose Reid as the best of the options. Obviously oblivious to the fact that he was also scottish.

66

bluehead,

edinburgh 14/05/2008 11:45:53
bottling brown is at it again, his new title is the bribe minister,who does he think he is kidding?this is further proof he thinks that the voters are stupid,,
stop all your little jokes broonie and do the right thing,and that is go and take your pile with you
we need fresh air
67

Nikostratos,

14/05/2008 11:46:41
#77

But that has to balanced with the snp party "they don't give a f**k about Scotland"? only snp supporters. That's why they are quiet happy to allow polish etc immigrants a vote in a referendum. Unlike Scot's who have temporary residence in other parts of the U.K and abroad.

Still most 'Normal' people understand the snp don't represent all the scottish peoples......After all they hate lib dems they hate the torys they hate labour supporters....and thats quite a chunk of the scottish peoples well in fact a majority.
68

Ken S.,

Reading 14/05/2008 11:51:51
#78
Alan Reid,NZ

".. after England went into their country uninvited .."


- A bit ironic, as you seem to be in such a country!
69

Nikostratos,

14/05/2008 11:52:05
#68 frank mcbride

Pardon me Frank but didn't the snp give a tax freeze to those who could afford to pay.........whose money could of been used to aid the less fortunate within scottish society............But the snp would rather put money in the wealthy's bank accounts than help the poor........

I believe it works out a lot more than 10p in the pound
70

Fairfax,

14/05/2008 11:52:06
Alan Reid (62): "The English are bigoted, that’s the way it is, and that’s why Scotland should go in its own way,"

Most interesting. Would you extend your description to the 10% of the Scots population who are English? Furthermore, do you believe the Scots would vote for a First Minister who was English? England's ethnic minority population now exceeds the population of Scotland (and, for that matter, New Zealand) and, although relations have deteriorated, there seems to be little sign of general bigotry.
71

Alan B,

14/05/2008 11:52:19
#25 AM2

"But his comment that Scots tend “to be lower earners” is simply untrue."

Is it? What are the median earnings for england compared to scotland then?

Breaking down england to regions to show that scotland does better than some regions within england is irrelevant. How does scotland as a country directly compare to England?

I suspect that we are lower and that is why u have had to resort to breaking england down into regions.

If we are are comparing regions compare like with like. Scottish regions to english regions.
72

Fairfax,

14/05/2008 11:58:25
Liz (79): "Stop writing such garbage. If anything it is a small area in the South of England that might run out"

I agree with your post, but point out that the only problems in the South-East are due to infrastructure problems -- to compare, East Anglia, whose rainfall is less than London's, typically has no problems. There is, of course, a vast surplus of water in, and frequently falling on, England, but this peculiar Scottish fantasy never ends; to parody: "Once we're independent, our true greatness will be revealed! The English, humiliated in their poverty, will finally be forced to recognize our greatness!" The SNP should formally distance themselves from this, as they have rightly distanced themselves from ethnic nationalism.
73

Alan B,

14/05/2008 11:59:49
#82 Nikostratos

Spin as u like but u ignore the issue. Why would anyone in his right mind vote for a party (labour) where scottish members of that party believe that Westminster does not give a f*** about scotland?

Saying the snp do not give a f*** about scotland is just silly and grossly immature. U may not agree with the policy of independence but to state they the policy is effectly rooted in not giving a f*** about scotland defies any logic.
74

Fairfax,

14/05/2008 12:05:52
Alan Reid (78): "maybe all these Muslims coming into England are only getting their own back after England went into their country uninvited and f@cked it up!!!"

In that case, it's strange that Maori immigration is so low, but perhaps that's a special case. Our Muslim population mostly comes from Bangladesh and Pakistan, neither of which blame their current problems on Britain. Further, several rapidly increasing Muslim groups are from countries which were not part of the British Empire, such as Algeria, Indonesia and Turkey. There is also large Muslim immigration in European states that never had overseas empires, such as Denmark, Germany and Sweden. Perhaps you'll enlighten us with your views on this.
75

roughrider,

Glasgow 14/05/2008 12:28:27
Just watching the ,hammer of the poor cluless Broon,
on PMQ,s Its official labour do not give a fcuk about the low paid and will tax them as labour see fit.
This shower of hypocrites should be shown the door.
Broon is a lying bastar*
and does not have the bottle to call an election.
76

,

14/05/2008 12:40:07
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
77

John S,

14/05/2008 12:44:30
#74 oder:Mr Blair and Mr Brown singled out water use and supply as one of the most important pressures on the country's natural resources. Droughts that now occur once every 10 years are likely to happen every four or five years by the 2050s, and every two or three years by the 2080s.
The crisis will be worst in the South-east, where water companies are already barely able to meet demand. The number of households in England is expected to increase from 20.9m in 2003 to 24.8m by 2021, with most of the increase concentrated in the South-east. 28 November 2006.
Ken Livingstone today called for Londoners to use water more wisely as he announced a major water conservation campaign.Climate change, population growth and lifestyle changes are all placing increasing demands on London's water supply
He outlined the need to take difficult decisions now in order to avoid shortages in London in the future.27-6-2005
10 years ago, Yorkshire Water seriously considered the use of standpipes in Bradford and having 12-hourly rota cuts.18 July 2005.
Russia, New Zealand, Norway and Scotland have all considered exporting water. May 14 2008
78

,

14/05/2008 12:45:17
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
79

Arfur,

14/05/2008 14:17:56
Jackie - mine has been pulled as well but i think it was by Nikostratos as i was posting how much of a fool he was.

p.s. if you type 'the hootsman' in google the scotsman website comes up. brilliant!
80

Boggle fey the Bog,

14/05/2008 14:27:03
45 AM2,Scotland,UK 14/05/2008 08:25:35

Appears you ain't got that right see post #92 above

I also refer you to the table on p2 of the relevant document, which clearly states, that the Median wage in April 2007 was £361.70, it would appear as usual, you just 'cut n paste' and do not compare 'like with like'.

A step further if you exclude part-time workers and include overtime, bonuses and other emoluments we then have a figure of £461.54 UK wide, so it's a bit like the Onionist Govs inflation figure of 3.5% pa, is it not.

Just pure lies and fantasies.

#97 Arfur, LOL, type in Wendy Alexander in Google right at the bottom of the page look at the headline from the Scotsman.

Scotsman.com News - Wendy Alexander quits,

unfortunately it is only a 'place holder' but they obviously have the story written, a bit like the obits :-))
81

Boggle fey the Bog,

14/05/2008 14:27:35
Fisrt time I ever got the Century :-))
82

Alex X,

14/05/2008 14:31:43
Oh the original quote has been removed and I hear that the poster has been banned. Och weel it is worth quoting again.


"Our long term objective is a lower starting rate of income tax of ten pence in the pound."

-Labour 1997 election manifesto
83

Boggle fey the Bog,

14/05/2008 14:33:51
#101 Oooowwweee was so excited I mispelt First....Oooppps ...sorry people ;-)
84

GlenB,

Skye 14/05/2008 14:34:43
I wonder how many times their mantra that "22 million are better off" will be repeated before they realise that it is no compensation for the 1 million of the poorest who are still worse off.

Gordon was at it again on PMQ's today.

To quote a song "Gordon is a moron" and to misquote another "Darling is a Charlie".
85

Boggle fey the Bog,

14/05/2008 14:36:07
103 AM2,Scotland,UK 14/05/2008 14:32:40

As I said look at the 'relevent' document, and you will see the information.

ashe1107(1).pdf
86

Boggle fey the Bog,

14/05/2008 14:37:37
106 AM2,Scotland,UK 14/05/2008 14:35:04

You obviously don't know how to do long division.

I leave the fantasy stuff to you.
87

danbob,

14/05/2008 14:54:59
# 62 Alan Reid; If your comments about the english being bigoted rung true, how come Blair won three elections in a row.
88

Boggle fey the Bog,

14/05/2008 15:01:39
110 danbob,14/05/2008 14:54:59

What, ya mean Bliar wissnae English? Well I'll be a crossed-toed hornswogler!! ;-))
89

Fairfax,

14/05/2008 15:14:38
John S (93): "Droughts that now occur once every 10 years are likely to happen every four or five years by the 2050s, and every two or three years by the 2080s."

There is very little understanding of rainfall changes, even generally accepting global warming. In brief, the problem is that the numerical models for clouds and oceanography are simply not able to make such predictions with any reliability.
It is interesting that, during the Medieval Warming and Little Ice Age, no catastrophic rainfall changes occurred -- which is not to say that Britain's past does not contain intermittent periods of famine, particularly in agriculturally marginal areas, such as much of Scotland. In any case, despite the claims of Brown, Blair and Livingstone, there is little worry for England's future rainfall in the near future, although it is likely to require infrastructure investment to bring water from, say, the generally wetter west to the east.
90

Boggle fey the Bog,

14/05/2008 15:17:55
111 AM2,Scotland,UK 14/05/2008 15:00:00

Suggest you read it again and try to understand it, if there are any big words you don't understand, use 'the Oxford'

My figures are for ALL employees paid the 'adult rate'?,(whatever that may mean)INCLUDING part time workers, and excluding bonuses, overtime and other emoluments(lower figure , the pertinent one).

The higher of the two figures relate to FULL TIME Adult employees including bonuses, overtime and other emoluments.

Well if you know 'how' to then it would reasonably follow that you would also know the 'why for'.
But then again I may be making a presumption to far. In as much that you are reasonable, or cohesive in the thought process.

And I see yer at the owld cut n paste agin Tisk Tisk
91

Boggle fey the Bog,

14/05/2008 15:25:21
111 AM2,Scotland,UK 14/05/2008 15:00:00

What has 'averages' got to do with it?
92

Steve McGregor,

Dundee 14/05/2008 15:46:44
Can anyone else see the similarities regarding the enthusiasm and desire to hold into power between Gordon Brown and Robert Mugabe? I began to think if Brown had the power to deploy armed forces to protect his position as a PM, he definitely would.
93

Boggle fey the Bog,

14/05/2008 15:53:09
118 AM2,Scotland,UK 14/05/2008 15:26:30

Stop talking keech. I am quoting from the governments own published figures,for Adults.

119 AM2,Scotland,UK 14/05/2008 15:28:58

If you gave me that answer in an examination I would give you no marks.

Statistically it would be acceptable if you coupled it with the word 'mean' or 'weighted', but not with the terms 'Median' or 'Mode'.

As I have said before try comparing 'like' with 'like'
94

Publius,

London 14/05/2008 16:31:57
Interesting thought. Darling has just knocked eighteen quid per person off the potential take from LIT.
Will Swinney have to get out his abacus again?
95

Fairfax,

14/05/2008 16:34:56
Boggle (121): "If you gave me that answer in an examination I would give you no marks."

If you're referring to AM2's following sentence "The word "average" can refer to median, mean or any other measure of central tendency.", then it's fine.

As a mathematician, I dislike the common statistical use of the term "measure of central tendency", because I would prefer to reserve such a term for the variance, say: measuring central tendency suggests a description for the spread of the data. However, his term is entirely standard.


96

Brian M,

Edinburgh 14/05/2008 17:21:01
Proof that Broon is running scared. I hope that Labour lose the Crewe by-election, it might lead to Broon letting us keep even more of our hard-earned money
97

frank mcbride,

lusitania 14/05/2008 18:29:51
AM2.

You really are a trick. Spin whatever statistics you care to use. Relative poverty is real: it is not imagined.

The reality of the Budget (2007) Amendment is that
1 100 000 "hard working" people will be poorer - in your words, will have less purchasing power.

Your apology for the Union is a disgrace. Using statistics to prove one's case, in the face of reality, proves that you are a dissembler.

If your statistical analysis holds any water, please explain the following:

1. The largest Government (in real terms) debt in history.
2. The highest personal (in real terms) debt in history.
3. The highest personal taxation - excuding the super-rich, in history.
4. £22 000 000 000 of hidden, not accounted for in Govt. figures, PFI/PPP debt.
5. Highest number ever on Means-Test.
6. An ever widening gap between the rich and poor - the rich getting richer, the poor getting poorer, in real terms.

Yes AM2, we are living in a rich land, unfortunately the ordinary person is not receiving an equitable share of this bounty.

In an analysis of the Union v Independence, the SNP Govt. wins hands down in its support for ordinary people, in attempting to shift the tax burden from those least able to pay, to those most able to pay. To aleviating some of the financial stresses on all students (education is a right, not a privilege). To removing the tax on health (prescription charges). To getting rid of superfluous, duplicated (placemen) Quangos. In attempting to make it easier for small businesses to survive and prosper, thus helping create employment.

Please bring your distortions forward that we make see, clearly, the paucity and selfishness of the Unionist argument.
98

Fairfax,

14/05/2008 20:21:01
Frank McBride (132): "1. The largest Government (in real terms) debt in history."

I'm no fan of the Union, but our current national debt, whilst too large after 11 years of Scottish chancellors, is not large in historical terms. As a percentage of GDP, it's currently around the 45%-50% level, even allowing for financial legerdemain. To put this in historical context, it exceeded 100% of GDP for the 40 year period from 1920 until 1960. [see the following Institue of Fiscal Studies report:http://www.ifs.org.uk/bns/bn26.pdf].

99

weh,

14/05/2008 21:10:07
Skye commented
The current Treasury donkey is no better, I think he's just a puppet whose strings are pulled by the PM !"

WELL! Whoever would have though that!

How perceptive you are, Skye!
100

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

14/05/2008 21:43:07
The 10p rate was an idiotic thing to do in the first place - it would have been far better to raise tax thresholds in the first place to take the lowest earners out of the tax system altogether - if you are going to play with taxes why not look at closing all the loopholes that the leeches use to avoid paying tax?
101

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

14/05/2008 21:45:26
#135 There is not raelly any absolute poverty in this country - it is all relative poverty - some people seem to confuse (deliberately) the two.
102

Boggle fey the Bog,

14/05/2008 22:09:26
135 AM2,Scotland,UK 14/05/2008 21:04:30

Still at eh!!

Fact: In 2005/06, around 13 million people in the UK were living in households below this low income threshold. This is around a fifth (22%) of the population.

Fact: This 13 million figure is an increase of ¾ million compared with the previous year, 2004/05. It follows six uninterrupted years of decreases from 1998/1999 to 2004/05 and is the first increase since 1996/97

Yes the poor are getting poorer and there is more of them......

Oh yeah..... and the source ......
The SAME ONE YOU ARE BLUIDY WELL USING PLONK!!!!
103

Boggle fey the Bog,

14/05/2008 22:12:25
136 AM2,Scotland,UK 14/05/2008 21:07:26

On the UNION heres a revealing little bit Broon says 'He will use any means possible to prevent the break up of the Union'
The key words are "any means" this means the use of military force.... Brown has declared war on Scotland!!!
104

Matt there,

somewhere 14/05/2008 22:39:12
A whole £2.30 a week. Wow.

The wit and wisdom of Gordon Brown knows no beginning.
105

Alan Reid,

NZ 14/05/2008 22:49:56
83, No mate your lot did.
89 Fairfax, I do not have a problem with muslims, in fact i have a few friends are Muslims.
Also I do know of some Maoris, working in the oil patch in Aberdeen, buut my point is Scotland did not invade NZ England did, granted there were Scots involved in that.
110 danbob, Beats me! how come Bush won a second term??
106

frank mcbride,

lusitania 14/05/2008 22:52:20
AM2.

Yet again you quote selectively.

The poor are getting poorer. Again, to use your own words, their purchasing power is diminished.

UK personal tax is at its highest ever; for the average wage earner, over 50%.

Fairfax.

In real terms, UK Govt. debt is at its highest ever. Please try using normal accounting practices rather than NuLabour's.
The Brown "Golden Rule" is no basis on which to make a judgement as the validity of his assertions has been challenged on many occasions.

AM2 & Fairfax.

As I said in my previous post, I await Unionist distortion. I listed 6 points for Unionist apologists to refute. I also suggested reasons for Independence because of the actions of the SG.

I will be happy to see your distortions, disembling and disinformation, yet again, in print.

The people know, you know, that their purchasing power is getting less. This is reality, not perception.

WHY, in a very rich country (UK, GB, Scotland; whatever you care to call it) do we require a Means-Test?

BTW, I see Mr Brown's new slogan is "For a fairer and prosperous Britain". He even had to steal that. Before the Scottish General Election, I, and many others were calling for people to vote SNP for, can you guess, "A FAIRER AND MORE PROSPEROUS SCOTLAND".

As I said, in my earlier post, the SNP Govt. are proving their commitment to the people.
107

Alan Reid,

NZ 14/05/2008 22:54:12
AM, "But actually, the quality of life in Norway - while overall very good - isn't all you might imagine" Total and utter garbage, but again you miss the point. Norway can decide which path it chooses, Scotland cannot!
108

Fairfax,

14/05/2008 23:11:00
frank mcbride (149): "In real terms, UK Govt. debt is at its highest ever."

I'm an English Tory (essentially) who supports dissolution of the Union, not a Labour Unionist, but this point has little relevance. Britain's GDP is also, in real terms, at its highest level. To repeat my earlier point, the national debt, as a percentage of GDP, is not historically high -- it's roughly the same as it was in 1910.

"I listed 6 points for Unionist apologists to refute."

I'm not a Unionist, but your first point is economically irrelevant, for the reasons I've given above. If you wish to argue against the Union effectively, please learn some economics.

109

Andrew BOD,

Aberdeen/shire 14/05/2008 23:12:24
AM2

What's your take on Brown's latest tax plan?

Is it right to borrow money to finance a compensation package for people who don't need to be compensated?

Would it not be better to do a U-turn on a progressive (fair) tax and remove a flat-rate tax instead, e.g. fuel duty?

It's very difficult to get a straight answer from you, y'know. Most often you come onto a thread attacking another's point of view and continue that tactic throughout the whole thread without ever commenting on the real story. Are you a real Labour spin doc?
110

indune1,

Canada 14/05/2008 23:53:08

148 - you are a smug, revisionist twit.

Invasions have happened since the dawn of time. They are still occuring.

You seem to feel morally superior through a bit of Pom-bashing. Juvenile at best. Check your pedigree, mate. You'll find some imperialist Scots amongst them.

No one is pure. It's just the victors who get to write the history.

Don't like that fact? Then go out and do something about it rather than subjecting us to your lame, limp and bigoted postings.

111

,

15/05/2008 03:48:23
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
112

Lady inwaiting,

Glenrothes 15/05/2008 10:23:00
G I M M I C K
113

vorlic,

edinburgh 26/05/2008 10:43:22
have the working low paid class in the uk not realized that we are just here to keep the well off upper class in the lifestyle that they are accustomed too.
114

Black Beard,

26/05/2008 15:58:33
Same as the 'stimulus' checks in the US. They 'gave' me $600.00 with one hand while picking my pocket for about 5k with the other.

If you can afford to give it back then it stands to reason that you didn't really need it in the first place did you?

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 

Featured Advertising



Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.