Wednesday 6th April 2016

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Wed 06 Apr, 2016 9:18 pm

Sorry if this has already been linked but just how bad is this?

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... n-offshore" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 06 Apr, 2016 9:20 pm

"Treating skilled work as if it isn’t skilled work certainly doesn’t work."

- Christina Patterson
We hear a lot about compassion for the elderly. Isn’t it time we showed some?

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... -patterson" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

mbc1955 · Post by **mbc1955** » Wed 06 Apr, 2016 9:23 pm

GetYou wrote:
refitman wrote:Ukip: piss-ups and breweries spring to mind: http://politicalscrapbook.net/2016/04/d ... publicity/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Well, you know what they say. A leopard can't change his stripes.

I thought it was his shorts.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Wed 06 Apr, 2016 9:25 pm

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Wed 06 Apr, 2016 9:26 pm

Could it be he's really going this time?

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Wed 06 Apr, 2016 9:30 pm

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:Sorry if this has already been linked but just how bad is this?

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... n-offshore" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The article says:
Voters will be fair-minded enough to acknowledge that they cannot be blamed for hailing from a privileged caste, but they will be less forgiving if evasive answers create any impression that they play by special rules. Candour, then, would be the best policy at any time.

And normally voters are lenient enough to leave them be. The difference now is they are taking far more than they should from us and have shown us nothing but contempt.
Even worse, they've misinterpreted that leniency as stupidity. And stupid we're not.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Wed 06 Apr, 2016 9:32 pm

I think Dave's going to have to resign - can't believe it

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Wed 06 Apr, 2016 9:34 pm

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Wed 06 Apr, 2016 9:38 pm

I was in the library when I read this and nearly laughed out loud when I reached #7.

Gird your fronted adverbials: 14 grammatical mistakes in the schools White Paper

https://www.tes.com/news/school-news/br ... ools-white

7. Try to avoid sounding like Yoda
“Great teachers – everywhere they’re needed”

Replace that dash with a comma, and the sentence sounds much less like a mournful reflection on the recruitment crisis.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Wed 06 Apr, 2016 9:42 pm

Just in case Davey does resign, what would the FTN playlist be?

[youtube]ttJBdr6eBuo[/youtube]

Post by **refitman** » Wed 06 Apr, 2016 9:51 pm

[quote="PaulfromYorkshire"]Just in case Davey does resign, what would the FTN playlist be?

Surely you've got to go with his favourite song.
[youtube]wJRmrlkYdsQ[/youtube]
" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Wed 06 Apr, 2016 9:52 pm

I know I shouldn't, but this is so important

David Cameron personally intervened in 2013 to weaken an EU drive to reveal the beneficiaries of trusts, creating a possible loophole that other European nations warned could be exploited by tax evaders.
The disclosure of the prime minister’s resistance to opening up trusts to full scrutiny comes as he faces intense pressure to make clear whether his family stands to benefit from offshore assets linked to his late father.
Although Mr Cameron championed corporate tax transparency, he wrote in November 2013 to Herman Van Rompuy, president of the European Council at the time, to argue that trusts widely used for inheritance planning in Britain should win special treatment in an EU law to tackle money laundering.
In the letter, seen by the Financial Times, Mr Cameron said: “It is clearly important we recognise the important differences between companies and trusts. This means that the solution for addressing the potential misuse of companies, such as central public registries, may well not be appropriate generally.”
Britain has emerged as the strongest European rival to Switzerland for private banking and wealth management, administering £1.2tn of assets, according to Deloitte. The sector contributed £3.2bn to the economy, according to 2014 estimates from the British Bankers’ Association.
A senior government source said that Mr Cameron’s letter reflected official advice that creating a central registry for trusts would have been complex and would have distracted from the main objective of shining a light on the ownership of shell companies.
“It would have slowed down the process because of the different types of trust involved,” the official said. “They are sometimes used to protect vulnerable people, so that would have been an extra complication.
It is clearly important we recognise the important differences between companies and trusts. This means that the solution for addressing the potential misuse of companies — such as central public registries — may well not be appropriate generally
- Extract of 2013 letter from David Cameron to Herman Van Rompuy
“As the directive went through we reached a position where trusts which generate tax consequences had to demonstrate their ownership to HM Revenue & Customs.”
According to officials, the UK stance in 2013 prompted clashes with France and Austria as well as with members of the European Parliament, who accused Britain of double standards in the fight against tax avoidance.
Maria Fekter, the Austrian finance minister at the time, had attacked Britain earlier that year as “the island of the blessed for tax evasion and money laundering”. She cited trusts as a specific problem.
The Panama Papers revelations, which centre on how a law firm, Mossack Fonseca, helped thousands to set up offshore structures, is the latest setback to Britain’s claim to be tough on tax.
Along with the discovery that Ian Cameron, the prime minister’s deceased father, was a director of an offshore fund advised by Mossack Fonseca, the papers also show that the British Virgin Islands were by far the biggest destination for the transfer of wealth by the law firm.
The pressure on Mr Cameron over his family’s affairs prompted Downing Street to clarify again on Wednesday that “there are no offshore funds/trusts which the prime minister, Mrs Cameron or their children will benefit from in future”.
I saw it [the British position] as a danger and a possible loophole. Some member states saw it as an underhand way for the UK to get an advantage
- Judith Sargentini
The prime minister’s friends insist that Blairmore, set up by Ian Cameron in 1982, was not a tax-avoidance vehicle. Rather it was a means of taking advantage of the lifting of exchange rate controls in 1979.
It was based in a jurisdiction with a zero tax rate to ensure that investors from multiple jurisdictions were not exposed to extra layers of tax, but it relied on investors to pay tax on their profits from the fund in their home countries.
Mr Cameron’s 2013 intervention in the EU’s push for greater financial transparency was sparked by an EU initiative to set up national public registers to disclose the true, “beneficial” owners of shell companies and trusts.
According to Judith Sargentini, a Dutch lawmaker who led the parliament’s work on the draft law, the UK’s argument was that strict transparency rules would be a damaging interference into people’s privacy.
It argued that trusts have a special role in Britain in helping families manage issues around inheritance.
In depth

Panama Papers Leak

The spreading fallout from the data leak revealing widespread use of offshore financial centres by the rich and powerful
“I saw it [the British position] as a danger and a possible loophole,” Ms Sargentini told the FT. “Some member states saw it as an underhand way for the UK to get an advantage.”
While the final version of the law, adopted in 2015, was explicit in requiring central registers of companies’ true owners, the language for trusts was more ambiguous. Although a significant victory for Britain, it prompted warnings of potential abuse.
A trust is a legal arrangement where assets such as money, or property are held on behalf of someone else who will be the end beneficiary. Examples include “bare trusts”, where assets are held until the beneficiary is old enough to claim them, and more complex forms where, for example, interest can be passed on as it is accrued.
Calls for more transparency around trusts stem from concerns that they can be a tool for financial secrecy and for shifting assets offshore. In a notorious example, Sani Abacha, a deceased former president of Nigeria, embezzled billions partly by using offshore trusts.
Industry practitioners warn that working out the appropriate level of transparency is a fiendishly complex task given trusts’ legal structure. With power in the hands of the trustees, it is possible, and can be intentional, that someone does not even know that they stand to be a beneficiary.
“Trusts are yet another way to hide money,” Tove Maria Ryding at the European Network on Debt and Development, told the FT.

From the FT

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Wed 06 Apr, 2016 10:06 pm

Maybe Cameron could use this as part of the pro-EU campaign?

Temulkar · Post by **Temulkar** » Wed 06 Apr, 2016 10:08 pm

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:I think Dave's going to have to resign - can't believe it

Huh just started looking at the news, has something new happened? I thought it was all starting to blow over for Dave personally.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Wed 06 Apr, 2016 10:10 pm

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:Could it be he's really going this time?

I doubt it. Too many powerful people wanting to keep the status quo.
.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 06 Apr, 2016 10:12 pm

The Cameron network: inherited wealth and family companies

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... -companies" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

mbc1955 · Post by **mbc1955** » Wed 06 Apr, 2016 10:18 pm

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:Could it be he's really going this time?

I could do with a laugh.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Wed 06 Apr, 2016 10:29 pm

I'm worried we're going to be booted out of the EU by the electorate, on the back of Cameron's sleaze.

Getting out of the EU trumps everything with some of his strongest media allies.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 06 Apr, 2016 10:30 pm

https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... for-the-uk" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Link to Gov.EU Ref.leaflet

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 06 Apr, 2016 10:34 pm

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:Sorry if this has already been linked but just how bad is this?

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... n-offshore" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Awwww...How cute!
It's an article written by SamCam!

"But these were emphatically not choices made by Cameron Jr, a skilled operator
who has previously demonstrated a flair for audacity in a tight spot.

Remember those embarrassing bills for wisteria clearance at the young Conservative
leader’s home amid the expenses debacle of 2009, and how these were lopped away
by a merciless assault on the more shameless claims of various knights of the shire?

Recall, too, the potentially lethal explanation he had to give at the height of the
phone-hacking scandal as to why he had granted “a second chance” to the
disgraced former editor, Andy Coulson, whom he had hired to handle his press.
He brazened his way through with a refreshingly frank “and yes, that includes me”
speech about politicians and media moguls which, at least at the time, sounded like
a commitment to reform.

An equivalent blast of Cameronian chutzpah today might work wonders again...

To give the PM his due..."

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Wed 06 Apr, 2016 10:35 pm

HMRC faces questions today as it was unveiled that the departments own HQ and its nationwide network of 600 offices are all owned by offshore companies

[url]ttps://www.patreon.com/posts/5086813[/url]

It's become a farce.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 06 Apr, 2016 10:37 pm

Temulkar wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:I think Dave's going to have to resign - can't believe it
Huh just started looking at the news, has something new happened? I thought it was all starting to blow over for Dave personally.

(my bold)

Not even close.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 06 Apr, 2016 10:40 pm

ohsocynical wrote:
HMRC faces questions today as it was unveiled that the departments own HQ and its nationwide network of 600 offices are all owned by offshore companies

[url]ttps://www.patreon.com/posts/5086813[/url]
It's become a farce.

https://www.patreon.com/posts/hmrc-under-fire-5086813" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 06 Apr, 2016 10:50 pm

IMF calls for labour market reform to boost jobs

Reforms include higher public spending to help the jobless find work, cutting
benefits to encourage the jobless to take low-paid work and cutting taxes

http://www.theguardian.com/business/201 ... growth-imf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Been there, done that
thanks, IMF, as useful as ever

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Wed 06 Apr, 2016 10:51 pm

That might not be reliable. TMR news have... 49 followers.

They tweet out stuff like this.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Wed 06 Apr, 2016 10:55 pm

citizenJA wrote:
IMF calls for labour market reform to boost jobs

Reforms include higher public spending to help the jobless find work, cutting
benefits to encourage the jobless to take low-paid work and cutting taxes

http://www.theguardian.com/business/201 ... growth-imf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Been there, done that
thanks, IMF, as useful as ever

They're not coming at it from where Britain is. More from where France is. Lots of Hollande's party basically agree with them. So would someone like Jonathan Portes, who is recognizably on the left.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Wed 06 Apr, 2016 11:04 pm

Quinn ‏@QuinnBelfast 6h6 hours ago

#PIP assess took over 2hrs. It was intrusive & highly personal & I do NOT agree that an assessor can put hands on me to test strength etc!

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Wed 06 Apr, 2016 11:08 pm

From 2012

They're all at it.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... -rise.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Temulkar · Post by **Temulkar** » Wed 06 Apr, 2016 11:11 pm

citizenJA wrote:
Temulkar wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:I think Dave's going to have to resign - can't believe it
Huh just started looking at the news, has something new happened? I thought it was all starting to blow over for Dave personally.
(my bold)

Not even close.

Really? He's pretty much answered the questions, obfusticatingly of course, but I would say it would take something else to rock him now. I don't see anymore damaging revelations, or proof he has been decietful. So far I don't see anything in the news he can't brazen out. I havent caught up on everything yet though.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Wed 06 Apr, 2016 11:18 pm

Temulkar wrote:
citizenJA wrote:
Temulkar wrote: Huh just started looking at the news, has something new happened? I thought it was all starting to blow over for Dave personally.
(my bold)

Not even close.
Really? He's pretty much answered the questions, obfusticatingly of course, but I would say it would take something else to rock him now. I don't see anymore damaging revelations, or proof he has been decietful. So far I don't see anything in the news he can't brazen out. I havent caught up on everything yet though.

There seems to be talk of a second offshore fund in Jersey

And the letter to the EU asking for opt outs for trust funds.

But most importantly there's the Brexit brigade who want to see him damaged. So he doesn't have them all rallying round. Au contraire.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 06 Apr, 2016 11:20 pm

http://www.labour.org.uk/page/s/our-par ... ing-review" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Our Party: made by members

Policy-Making Review

Other parties are available.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 06 Apr, 2016 11:24 pm

http://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/ap ... are_btn_tw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

No 10 in lockdown as queries persist over offshore fund of Ian Cameron

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 06 Apr, 2016 11:24 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:
citizenJA wrote:
IMF calls for labour market reform to boost jobs

Reforms include higher public spending to help the jobless find work, cutting
benefits to encourage the jobless to take low-paid work and cutting taxes

http://www.theguardian.com/business/201 ... growth-imf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Been there, done that
thanks, IMF, as useful as ever
They're not coming at it from where Britain is. More from where France is. Lots of Hollande's party basically agree with them. So would someone like Jonathan Portes, who is recognizably on the left.

I don't care who the IMF is aiming this garbage advice at.
It's wrong.
If Portes and Hollande agree with this, they're wrong too.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 06 Apr, 2016 11:27 pm

http://www.thecomet.net/news/hitchin_mp ... _1_4485289" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Hitchin MP Peter Lilley resigns as patron of Herts Aid three weeks after dismissing petition

Temulkar · Post by **Temulkar** » Wed 06 Apr, 2016 11:30 pm

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
Temulkar wrote:
citizenJA wrote:(my bold)

Not even close.
Really? He's pretty much answered the questions, obfusticatingly of course, but I would say it would take something else to rock him now. I don't see anymore damaging revelations, or proof he has been decietful. So far I don't see anything in the news he can't brazen out. I havent caught up on everything yet though.
There seems to be talk of a second offshore fund in Jersey

And the letter to the EU asking for opt outs for trust funds.

But most importantly there's the Brexit brigade who want to see him damaged. So he doesn't have them all rallying round. Au contraire.

Sadly, I dont see a smoking gun.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Wed 06 Apr, 2016 11:44 pm

citizenJA wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote:
citizenJA wrote: Been there, done that
thanks, IMF, as useful as ever
They're not coming at it from where Britain is. More from where France is. Lots of Hollande's party basically agree with them. So would someone like Jonathan Portes, who is recognizably on the left.
I don't care who the IMF is aiming this garbage advice at.
It's wrong.
If Portes and Hollande agree with this, they're wrong too.

France has had very high non-wage employment costs. You don't have to be a rightwinger state shrinker to think that some of those taxes might be better raised elsewhere or some middle class subsidies cut.

utopiandreams · Post by **utopiandreams** » Wed 06 Apr, 2016 11:44 pm

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:Sorry if this has already been linked but just how bad is this?

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... n-offshore" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

From the linked article...

An equivalent blast of Cameronian chutzpah today might work wonders again – assuming, of course, that no awkward secrets are still lurking behind the evolving denials. To give the PM his due he has, since 2013 at least, uttered some very good words about tax. If he would now follow up with commensurate deeds, and next month’s OECD summit provides an opportune moment for that, then the fine rhetorical record could yet allow him to emerge with his reputation enhanced. Especially, perhaps, if he combined it with a “and yes, that includes us” speech about how wealthy families had retarded action for too long.

Chutzpah indeed, that about sums up his every utterance. As for his 'very good words about tax' this is what I was referring to the other day about backing himself into a corner. Personally I think he's crap at PR, something he's supposedly also known for but resorts instead to saying what people want to hear and in this case, tax, public opinion pushed him. The same could be said of Scottish independence and EU referenda. Call me Dave, a man of the people giving them what they want, except he hadn't factored in how close a call they were.

So Dave is full of populist soundbites, but and it's a big but, he's also an incorrigible liar. This is what most offends me. Well almost, what actually offends me most is that both the media and apparently most folk, who don't know otherwise, just accept his words as carrying substance... and substance is the one thing he most lacks. Pledges, promises and concern are nothing more than performing to his immediate audience. 'And once the performance is over... a few deep breaths and a piss then it is promptly forgotten until the next act and never decisive action.

It seems my recall of his being led by the Red Queen was also apposite given that we've been reminded of more of his empty words by Christopher Jefferies and the McCanns today. They use betrayal to describe him whereas I just see a wide boy that was born into money. Oh yeah did Jess Phillips (not spell-checked) say he was just average and not very clever? I don't often agree with her.

Edit: corrected the quote.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Wed 06 Apr, 2016 11:46 pm

Temulkar wrote:
citizenJA wrote:
Temulkar wrote: Huh just started looking at the news, has something new happened? I thought it was all starting to blow over for Dave personally.
(my bold)

Not even close.
Really? He's pretty much answered the questions, obfusticatingly of course, but I would say it would take something else to rock him now. I don't see anymore damaging revelations, or proof he has been decietful. So far I don't see anything in the news he can't brazen out. I havent caught up on everything yet though.

I don't think he's answered whether he benefited from an offshore trust in the past, has he? I can't see how he avoids answering about his inheritance from his father. His father's firm being named in those documents is very important.

Then again, he's got out of it before.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 06 Apr, 2016 11:55 pm

FWIW I just think those already "annoyed" will just continue to be so,many will just shrug their shoulders "their all at it" does him no harm.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 06 Apr, 2016 11:56 pm

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/ng-i ... are_btn_tw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Hillsborough victims: the 96 people whose lives were cut short

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 06 Apr, 2016 11:58 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:
citizenJA wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote: They're not coming at it from where Britain is. More from where France is. Lots of Hollande's party basically agree with them. So would someone like Jonathan Portes, who is recognizably on the left.
I don't care who the IMF is aiming this garbage advice at.
It's wrong.
If Portes and Hollande agree with this, they're wrong too.
France has had very high non-wage employment costs. You don't have to be a rightwinger state shrinker to think that some of those taxes might be better raised elsewhere or some middle class subsidies cut.

Denying resources for unemployed people in any country in the EU at this time is an outrageous suggestion. Did you read the article? It said people ought to take lower-waged jobs and governments needed to cut funding to unemployment people to encourage them to do so. You don't have to be a Marxist to call that unbearable capitalist exploitation.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Thu 07 Apr, 2016 12:00 am

Goodnight, everyone.
love,
cJA

utopiandreams · Post by **utopiandreams** » Thu 07 Apr, 2016 12:07 am

Going to go and read more revelations of the Panama Papers at the G now but first I seem to recall Mark Thatcher being amongst the names. I'm not sure but don't think it was a British news outlet. If I'm right we'll no doubt hear more.

Postscript: I see Mark is indeed named. Now there's a man of questionable deeds.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Thu 07 Apr, 2016 12:07 am

http://www.harvard-digital.co.uk/euro/pamphlet.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

1975 Referendum Government Leaflet

YOUR RIGHT TO CHOOSE

I ask you again to read and discuss this pamphlet.

Above all, I ask you to use your vote.

For it is your vote that will now decide. The Government will accept your verdict.

[Signed:]

Harold Wilson

The Government have recommended that Britain should stay in on the new terms which have been agreed with the other members of the Common Market.

But you have the right to choose.

[
TIME FOR YOU
TO DECIDE

The Government have made THEIR choice. They believe that the new terms of membership are good enough for us to carry on INSIDE the Community. Their advice is to vote for staying in.

Now the time has come for you to decide. The Government will accept your decision - whichever way it goes.

The choice is up to YOU. It is YOUR decision.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Thu 07 Apr, 2016 12:44 am

Worryingly,from my point of view the Government leaflet may well sway the undecided towards voting no.I posted the above to contrast,in tone.