Friday 3rd July 2015

[SpinningHugo]

I saw the face of Mr. Miliband after the 2015 GE result

I did too. This is admittedly a matter of impression, but mine was not the same as yours. I was somewhat surprised he was able to make jokes about Milifandom for example.

As for the list of horrors, I am pretty sure I can give you a long list of Thatcher's actions that would horrify. We have no metric to prove who is right or wrong of course (see also miliband)

[SpinningHugo]

They need a cushion so that when jobs come to an end they aren't forced either to keep hundreds of people idle or sack them.

It is obvious you have never been a building-site worker. Sacking people is exactly what they do. And they hoard land to keep prices high, by regulating supply and demand, not to even their workload.

If local authorities were in charge of real housing policy, they would be instructed to start building on this or that site, with the threat of compulsory purchase if they were reluctant. That's the way to build the houses we need, it seems to me, if it is necessary to have private companies doing the building.

Ed Miliband's government was going to do that, compulsory purchase so local authorities could get on with it.
I agree with your post.

Did you read the manifesto? the relevant section is set out above, as is the long report it is based on. I don't think your impression is correct.

[citizenJA]

Properly sold, an LVT would have been no more unpopular than the mansion tax, indeed probably less so.

Land Value Tax is an excellent idea, I agree.

[citizenJA]

It is obvious you have never been a building-site worker. Sacking people is exactly what they do. And they hoard land to keep prices high, by regulating supply and demand, not to even their workload.

If local authorities were in charge of real housing policy, they would be instructed to start building on this or that site, with the threat of compulsory purchase if they were reluctant. That's the way to build the houses we need, it seems to me, if it is necessary to have private companies doing the building.

Ed Miliband's government was going to do that, compulsory purchase so local authorities could get on with it.
I agree with your post.

Did you read the manifesto? the relevant section is set out above, as is the long report it is based on. I don't think your impression is correct.

"We will get 200,000 homes built a year by 2020. This will close the gap between the number of homes we build and the number of homes we need, as well as providing up to 230,000 jobs in construction.

We will unblock the supply of new homes by giving local authorities "use it or lose it" powers over developers who hoard land that has planning permission so that they can sell it on for a bigger profit, instead of building on it now.

We will deliver a new generation of New Towns and Garden Cities, and give a new "right to grow" to communities who want to expand but are blocked by neighbouring local authorities.

We will tackle empty homes by giving councils more power to charge higher rates of council tax on empty properties, and ensure new homes are advertised in the UK first, not overseas."

http://www.labour.org.uk/issues/detail/house-building" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

(my bold)

Yes, I've read it & the bold bit is what I was referring to.

[citizenJA]

I saw the face of Mr. Miliband after the 2015 GE result

I did too. This is admittedly a matter of impression, but mine was not the same as yours. I was somewhat surprised he was able to make jokes about Milifandom for example.

As for the list of horrors, I am pretty sure I can give you a long list of Thatcher's actions that would horrify. We have no metric to prove who is right or wrong of course (see also miliband)

You didn't bother arguing your own argument! You're the one announcing it's 'rhetoric' & inaccurate Tory government in 2010-2015 wasn't as bad as Thatcher. I disagreed with you & gave you evidence for my reasons why.
I don't watch a lot of moving media. The Milifandom I don't know. I saw stills of Ed Miliband's face & I saw how devastated he was a Labour government wasn't returned to government. He wanted a Labour government & so did his team. That's the reason I posted what I saw in Miliband's face. He was the Labour party leader with a winning team & manifesto.
Labour wanted to win.
Labour want to win.
You don't agree Labour want to win.
Okay.

[Tonibel]

The interviews are near identical. the reason Kendall's has been picked up is that she has been rude. She has called the others the 'continuity Miliband' candidates. This has been noticed because it is rude with a grain of truth to it. (I think it is also unfair, and the kind of thing I might say on the internet when particularly frustrated by someone saying Kendall is a Tory and should just fuck off (or indeed that I am and should).)

Feel free to criticise her for what she has said. but to denounce her as in some way a Murdoch stooge different from the others is just nonsense.

You write this as if it is already an accepted fact that being a 'continuity Miliband' is a bad thing.

I would challenge that. I doubt it would be possible for Labour to win without the support of people who voted in 2010 and 2015. It's not that Kendall wants to appeal to a wider audience that's the problem, it's exactly what Labour needs and what all the candidates are attempting to do in their own ways (bar Corbyn). The problem with Kendall is she is only appealing to those to the right of Labour, what she says and how she says it is very off-putting to those who support Labour right now. She would
lose Labour a lot of voters, including me. Burnham and Cooper recognise that it is imperative to keep the core support on side, establish their trust, before trying to widen Labour's appeal in the coming years. That Kendall doesn't understand what is necessary to win the Labour leadership contest leads me to doubt whether she understands what is necessary to win an election. She (and you) seem to assume the 9m people who just voted for Labour did so despite Ed Miliband and his manifesto, but where is the evidence? It is just as possible that they voted for Labour because of Ed Miliband's manifesto and Labour risks losing them if they reject it entirely as Kendall seems to be doing (and if she isn't doing that, then she is appalling at putting herself across because that's how it seems).

Thank you Willow. Of course I want Labour to win in 2020 but I want it to be a Labour I can vote for. Under Kendall that would probably be unlikely.
Have any of the candidates mentioned PR yet?

[mikems]

Even if we made all house building a monopoly of the state, the state would still #hoard# land. You can't build housing on a just in time basis.

Who is suggesting that? I was suggesting a proper system of planned house building, not Stalinism. Can't argue with people willing to put such things into their opponent's mouths.

There is ZERO evidence of any increase in land hoarding (lots of evidence of a decline in house building, but that is a different matter).

I was not arguing that there was an increase in land hoarding, but that land is hoarded to the benefit of the building companies, not their workers or wider society. Honestly, it is as if these companies were operating for the common good, rather than shareholder benefit, in your world view.

[citizenJA]

Even if we made all house building a monopoly of the state, the state would still #hoard# land. You can't build housing on a just in time basis.

Pardon? Ring up the construction workers & the project gets done - it's a project underwritten by a sovereign country as an investment in people, affordable, quality housing. It takes time to build, yes. What do you mean by stating since private sector hoard land, the state would too? We hold this truth to be self-evident? No. No I don't.

There is ZERO evidence of any increase in land hoarding (lots of evidence of a decline in house building, but that is a different matter).

There's nothing going on all kinds of plots derelict or empty all over the country. Wasting a lot of what is necessary for a productive, secure, prosperous population. It ain' pretty either, derelict plots.

[mikems]

Second we need to assist local authorities in building, by cutting back right to buy, and enabling them to borrow.

I agree with that. But borrow from whom? Not, I would hope, from the finance corporations that already dominate the economy. There should be a public investment bank, backed by the government. Otherwise it will all be rotten with vested interest, speculative risk, high costs and inability to fund anything in downturns, like too many of our housing associations now they have been detached from local authorities and told to behave like businesses.

[AngryAsWell]

They need a cushion so that when jobs come to an end they aren't forced either to keep hundreds of people idle or sack them.

It is obvious you have never been a building-site worker. Sacking people is exactly what they do. And they hoard land to keep prices high, by regulating supply and demand, not to even their workload.

If local authorities were in charge of real housing policy, they would be instructed to start building on this or that site, with the threat of compulsory purchase if they were reluctant. That's the way to build the houses we need, it seems to me, if it is necessary to have private companies doing the building.

No.

Even if we made all house building a monopoly of the state, the state would still #hoard# land. You can't build housing on a just in time basis.

There is ZERO evidence of any increase in land hoarding (lots of evidence of a decline in house building, but that is a different matter).

What evidence do you want? A list of sites where permission has been granted but no houses built? Sites where work has started (so extending planning permission "work must start within 3 years of the granting of this application") and then stopped? If so I suggest you start at the Planning Portal, it will take some searching though.
Builders have been hoarding land for which they have permission waiting for two things
1) Full repeal of Section 106 so that there is no legal obligation at all to provide affordable housing on new build sites and obligations to provide infrastructure for the new build estates is cancelled or greatly reduced.
2) House prices in the areas they are holding land to increase.

[AnatolyKasparov]

Three local council byelections this week:

Cardiff - a poll on Tuesday to see out June saw a Tory hold, but only just as Plaid came from a poor third in 2012 to come within 1% of victory. This had been a Labour ward in 2004 in a close three way finish (Plaid 3rd) but the Tories won it narrowly in 2008 and held it even more tenuously in a by-election later that year (just 12 votes over Labour) before, to everybody's surprise, running away with it last time - beating Labour by close to 2 to 1 despite the latter sweeping back to power in the Welsh capital (the incumbent maybe showed some of that personal appeal by holding Cardiff N for the Tories, equally to the surprise of many, two months ago - his consequent resignation caused this contest) Labour slumped to a clear third this time (as with the Tories, there was a double digit drop in their share) not helped by their candidate being from well outside the area. Then three remaining candidates took just 4% between them - Independent, Green (down on last time) and last of all the LibDems (10 votes, or 0.7%)

Lincolnshire CC - another resignation caused by an incumbent being elected to the Commons saw an easy Tory hold this time, with a double figure increase to nearly half the vote after a close 3-way finish in 2013. Labour, who had won this division in 2005 before slumping to a poor third four years later and a closer one last time, came second now but still with their vote clearly down. UKIP - fighting this seat for the first time (it was one of the relatively few in Lincs they did not contest two years ago) - came third with a respectable but unremarkable 15%, but ahead of the "Lincolnshire Independents" who came second here in 2009 before running the Tories even closer last time - but they now dropped nearly 20 points and into 4th, clearly the Tories were the main beneficiaries of this.

Richmond upon Thames - A rather better result for the LibDems than in Cardiff as they took a seat from the Tories with a swing of about 17%, having actually finished third behind a lone Green candidate last time. They were able to win in this area in the halcyon days of 1986/90 when they had nearly every seat on the council, but by 2002 all three councillors returned here were Tory and that has remained the case until now (only in 2010, with a GE on the same day, did the LibDems even come reasonably close in recent years) The yellows took support from across the board - Greens fell to third with their share over halved on last year, though they still managed to beat Labour who were also down by over 7% on then. Another UKIP first appearance, but this is deeply unpromising territory for them and they got less than 3%, though that looks lavish compared to the hapless Independent who scored just *7* votes (getting fewer voters than proposers is always something of an achievement)

Things get busier for a while now (not least due to a spate of vacancies due to newly elected MPs) - eight contests next week.

[AngryAsWell]

Second we need to assist local authorities in building, by cutting back right to buy, and enabling them to borrow.

I agree with that. But borrow from whom? Not, I would hope, from the finance corporations that already dominate the economy. There should be a public investment bank, backed by the government. Otherwise it will all be rotten with vested interest, speculative risk, high costs and inability to fund anything in downturns, like too many of our housing associations now they have been detached from local authorities and told to behave like businesses.

No borrowing needed - just find a rich partner and give them the land to build for you. How it works out in the long term I'm not sure.....

http://www.manchester.gov.uk/news/artic ... _islington" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[AngryAsWell]

Second we need to assist local authorities in building, by cutting back right to buy, and enabling them to borrow.

I agree with that. But borrow from whom? Not, I would hope, from the finance corporations that already dominate the economy. There should be a public investment bank, backed by the government. Otherwise it will all be rotten with vested interest, speculative risk, high costs and inability to fund anything in downturns, like too many of our housing associations now they have been detached from local authorities and told to behave like businesses.

No borrowing needed - just find a rich partner and give them the land to build for you. How it works out in the long term I'm not sure.....

http://www.manchester.gov.uk/news/artic ... _islington" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Or borrow off your own pension fund as an investment

http://www.manchester.gov.uk/news/artic ... reen_light" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[citizenJA]

Decc faces 90% staff budget cuts that risk UK's climate plans, say experts
Dramatic cuts to Department of Energy and Climate Change budget could damage economic growth and undermine switch to clean energy
The UK’s Department of Energy and Climate Change (Decc) faces cuts of 90% to its staff budgets within three years, threatening the government’s ability to tackle climate change and move the energy supply to cleaner sources, according to an expert analysis.

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

Outrageous.

[mikems]

I like the pension fund idea...not so sure about the Abu Dhabi 'investment', though...

[SpinningHugo]

It is obvious you have never been a building-site worker. Sacking people is exactly what they do. And they hoard land to keep prices high, by regulating supply and demand, not to even their workload.

If local authorities were in charge of real housing policy, they would be instructed to start building on this or that site, with the threat of compulsory purchase if they were reluctant. That's the way to build the houses we need, it seems to me, if it is necessary to have private companies doing the building.

No.

Even if we made all house building a monopoly of the state, the state would still #hoard# land. You can't build housing on a just in time basis.

There is ZERO evidence of any increase in land hoarding (lots of evidence of a decline in house building, but that is a different matter).

What evidence do you want? A list of sites where permission has been granted but no houses built? Sites where work has started (so extending planning permission "work must start within 3 years of the granting of this application") and then stopped? If so I suggest you start at the Planning Portal, it will take some searching though.
Builders have been hoarding land for which they have permission waiting for two things
1) Full repeal of Section 106 so that there is no legal obligation at all to provide affordable housing on new build sites and obligations to provide infrastructure for the new build estates is cancelled or greatly reduced.
2) House prices in the areas they are holding land to increase.

What I would want is some evidence that the amount of land, in either value of area, held by developers has gone up.

there is none at all.

if you are going to build you need a stock of land held constant to build on in reserve. that hasn't changed.

it isn't the problem. the problem is supply and demand. blaming evil developers (with no evidence) is too easy.

[LadyCentauria]

I agree with that. But borrow from whom? Not, I would hope, from the finance corporations that already dominate the economy. There should be a public investment bank, backed by the government. Otherwise it will all be rotten with vested interest, speculative risk, high costs and inability to fund anything in downturns, like too many of our housing associations now they have been detached from local authorities and told to behave like businesses.

No borrowing needed - just find a rich partner and give them the land to build for you. How it works out in the long term I'm not sure.....

http://www.manchester.gov.uk/news/artic ... _islington" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Or borrow off your own pension fund as an investment

http://www.manchester.gov.uk/news/artic ... reen_light" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Wish there was some social rented in either of the mixes there, alongside the 'affordable' private sale and private rent dwellings.

[Tubby Isaacs]

I like the pension fund idea...not so sure about the Abu Dhabi 'investment', though...

The New York Fiscal Crisis was solved partly by borrowing off employee pension funds.

[Tubby Isaacs]

But Tubby, Labour's vote did decline. It was 13,5 million in 97. And Hague and Howard were both rubbish leaders and did not gain public support. You know this, so I don't really understand your interjection.

You implied Blair won only because of those things.

He and Brown did a fair bit right.

Averaging over 1% a year extra growth than Germany, for instance, and running 4 surpluses.

[Tubby Isaacs]

It was a cheap shot though, Mike. Sorry for that.

[LadyCentauria]

Solar Impulse is approaching Hawaii as it nears the end of its now-record-breaking journey from Hong Kong! Yippee! And here's to a safe landing very soon

[HindleA]

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/20 ... -being-ill" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Memo to David Cameron: I have all the incentives I need to stop being ill. It's called "being ill"
Disease isn’t like a gas meter. It has no notion of economics. It doesn’t switch off because you’ve stopped putting money in.



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

Leading Catholics write to Iain Duncan Smith to express fears over welfare cuts

[Tubby Isaacs]

Cameron's done like every government for the last 30 years, but much worse.

Start with the idea you'll get people on the sick working. Claim this will save lots of money. Nay, we'll be able to give those who need it more support!

Find that most of the people on the sick probably should be on the sick.

Cut the payments across the board and hope nobody worries too much about the people you said you cared about before.

[Willow904]

The interviews are near identical. the reason Kendall's has been picked up is that she has been rude. She has called the others the 'continuity Miliband' candidates. This has been noticed because it is rude with a grain of truth to it. (I think it is also unfair, and the kind of thing I might say on the internet when particularly frustrated by someone saying Kendall is a Tory and should just fuck off (or indeed that I am and should).)

Feel free to criticise her for what she has said. but to denounce her as in some way a Murdoch stooge different from the others is just nonsense.

You write this as if it is already an accepted fact that being a 'continuity Miliband' is a bad thing.

I would challenge that. I doubt it would be possible for Labour to win without the support of people who voted in 2010 and 2015. It's not that Kendall wants to appeal to a wider audience that's the problem, it's exactly what Labour needs and what all the candidates are attempting to do in their own ways (bar Corbyn). The problem with Kendall is she is only appealing to those to the right of Labour, what she says and how she says it is very off-putting to those who support Labour right now. She would
lose Labour a lot of voters, including me. Burnham and Cooper recognise that it is imperative to keep the core support on side, establish their trust, before trying to widen Labour's appeal in the coming years. That Kendall doesn't understand what is necessary to win the Labour leadership contest leads me to doubt whether she understands what is necessary to win an election. She (and you) seem to assume the 9m people who just voted for Labour did so despite Ed Miliband and his manifesto, but where is the evidence? It is just as possible that they voted for Labour because of Ed Miliband's manifesto and Labour risks losing them if they reject it entirely as Kendall seems to be doing (and if she isn't doing that, then she is appalling at putting herself across because that's how it seems).

Thank you Willow. Of course I want Labour to win in 2020 but I want it to be a Labour I can vote for. Under Kendall that would probably be unlikely.
Have any of the candidates mentioned PR yet?

I've only caught bits and bobs of the hustings so far. I've not heard anyone mention PR but Yvette Cooper's still committed to Ed's idea of a constitutional convention to tackle devolution and constitutional reform more generally, so at least it may be up for discussion.

[LadyCentauria]

Cripes! Heather Watson has just won a set against Serena Williams!! One set all...

[HindleA]

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/20 ... ic-service" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

As the Emergency Budget comes closer, the government must remember that benefits are a public service

Report article refers to

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/about ... sessments/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[AngryAsWell]

No borrowing needed - just find a rich partner and give them the land to build for you. How it works out in the long term I'm not sure.....

http://www.manchester.gov.uk/news/artic ... _islington" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Or borrow off your own pension fund as an investment

http://www.manchester.gov.uk/news/artic ... reen_light" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Wish there was some social rented in either of the mixes there, alongside the 'affordable' private sale and private rent dwellings.

There is, as I understand it Manchester council - who are providing the land - retain x number of properties for the social rent sector.
Its a big project they are undertaking, the sites I've linked to only tell part of the developments planned.
Here's a couple more

http://www.socialhousing.co.uk/manchest ... 15.article" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.manchester.gov.uk/news/10000 ... d_property" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[PorFavor]

Goodnight, everyone.

[ohsocynical]

Goodnight, everyone.

Night PF

[LadyCentauria]

Ye gods and saints and fairies what a match! Win to Williams but Watson fought her hell for leather to the very end. 6/2 4/6 7/5...

And Miss Williams says, "The way Heather was playing she should have won the match ... she could go way beyond Top Twenty."

[HindleA]

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015 ... are_btn_tw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Kids Company row highlights dilemma of charities at the sharp end of austerity
The likes of Camila Batmanghelidjh’s organisation are in a bind: dependent on government funding but determined to speak out about effect of cuts

[Tubby Isaacs]

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015 ... are_btn_tw

Kids Company row highlights dilemma of charities at the sharp end of austerity
The likes of Camila Batmanghelidjh’s organisation are in a bind: dependent on government funding but determined to speak out about effect of cuts

And if indeed Kid's Company has been useless and all the rest of it, how does that help the case for the Big Society rather than having the state spend state money?

[utopiandreams]

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/20 ... ic-service

As the Emergency Budget comes closer, the government must remember that benefits are a public service

Report article refers to

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/about ... sessments/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Thanks for the Citizen's Advice link, HindleA, partly because I was alarmed by what the DWP called an Impact Assessment of the under-occupancy penalty where, although mentioned, the impact of identified likely outcomes were not assessed at all. The discussed outcomes were those that IDS often believes to be his changes of behaviour despite evidence to the contrary.

Anyway whilst on their site I looked for any risk assessment the CAB may have done. I did find this advice to creditors and utility companies though, https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/Globa ... -final.pdf. Albeit informative I should say that you're likely to be angered by it. Not as a piece of work, much more fit for purpose than DWP research or publications, but for the total disregard this government has for social security. Furthermore the impact of many reforms are likely to be of greater financial cost regardless of any hardship.

[utopiandreams]

Repeated post after a time-out.

[AngryAsWell]

Martin Rowson on Jeremy Hunt's price-label plan – cartoon

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

[LadyCentauria]

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/20 ... -being-ill

Memo to David Cameron: I have all the incentives I need to stop being ill. It's called "being ill"
Disease isn’t like a gas meter. It has no notion of economics. It doesn’t switch off because you’ve stopped putting money in.



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

Leading Catholics write to Iain Duncan Smith to express fears over welfare cuts

Excellent piece by Rosie Fletcher, there. This just one of the truths therein:

Please do not be taken in by the weaselly misuse of the word incentive. Incentives are nice things, rewards, like cream cakes or that video of Michael Gove falling over. Cutting the money that sick and disabled people receive isn’t an incentive to work, it’s a disincentive and a punishment for being ill. You can paint it orange and call it a carrot as much as you like, but if you’re beating people into the ground with it, it’s still a stick.

(My bold.)

I doubt that IDS will 'recognise' that letter, 'though. He believes™ – although only in himself and his own views

[letsskiptotheleft]

I had a brief moment of unmitigated joy the day Labour regained Cardiff, taking over from a Lib Dem/Plaid coalition, since then there has been constant tales of factions and in-fighting, just what's needed in the run-up to the Assembly elections eh?!

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales ... on-9584684" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Christ, it's warm, even the heat from the laptop is too much.

[utopiandreams]

Martin Rowson on Jeremy Hunt's price-label plan – cartoon

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

I saw Jeremy on QT last night suggesting that NHS patients shall be more appreciative of the NHS if they knew how much medicines cost and would therefore be more likely to take them. I reckon he must be looking forward to all those appreciative letters and emails he'll be inundated with.

[citizenJA]

Goodnight, everyone.

Goodnight, PorFavor

[letsskiptotheleft]

No body can't say they weren't warned!

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015 ... ge-osborne" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And to think, there are those on our 'side' who vilified Ed Balls, he didn't get much wrong when it came to Osborne.

[rebeccariots2]

I had a brief moment of unmitigated joy the day Labour regained Cardiff, taking over from a Lib Dem/Plaid coalition, since then there has been constant tales of factions and in-fighting, just what's needed in the run-up to the Assembly elections eh?!

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales ... on-9584684" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Christ, it's warm, even the heat from the laptop is too much.

This sort of stuff is what utterly turned me off Labour at the end of Brown's rule. I even considered voting Lib Dem in my disgust - but didn't thank goodness. Yes - really stupid behaviour in the run-up to the Assembly election.

[StephenDolan]

Evening all.

Any ideas what is the best resource for seeing which (leader /deputy) candidates are visiting where?

[RogerOThornhill]

No body can't say they weren't warned!

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015 ... ge-osborne" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And to think, there are those on our 'side' who vilified Ed Balls, he didn't get much wrong when it came to Osborne.

I've just seen this recently published by the HoC library.

Inheritance Tax

http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ ... ry/SN00093" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Inheritance tax (IHT) is levied on the value of a person’s estate at the time of their death. The tax is charged at 40% above the tax-free threshold, which is £325,000 for 2015/16. In 2013/14 the tax raised £3.4 billion; receipts are forecast to be £4.2 billion in 2015/16.[1] It is estimated that the tax was paid on 28,000 estates in 2013/14, representing 4.9% of all deaths.[2

Osborne is calculating that people will have forgotten about this in 5 years time.

[HindleA]

@StephenDolan

http://www.labour.org.uk/blog/entry/you ... ip-husting" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Eric_WLothian]

The wheels of justice grind exceeding slow:

A HEARING will take place today to decide whether relatives of Lockerbie bombing victims could pursue an appeal on behalf of the only man convicted of the atrocity.
A group of British relatives maintain they have a ‘legitimate interest’ in trying to get the case of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi back before a court for a full appeal.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/transport/ ... -1-3820523

Some of us were never convinced of his guilt from the start.........

A sad day for Scottish justice when involved parties cannot attempt to overcome a perceived miscarriage of justice through the courts.

JUDGES have ruled that relatives of the victims of the Lockerbie bombing should not be allowed to pursue an appeal on behalf of the only man convicted of the atrocity.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/transport/ ... -1-3820523

[Hobiejoe]

Apropos nothing much in particular other than to mourn, yet again, the death of satire on the BBC.

Just seen the latest edition of Mock The Week. Pitiful.

It's almost as if they've been told to lay off the politics and go for the celebrity shit. But it's our BBC, surely they wouldn't do such a thing!

[citizenJA]

goodnight, everyone
love
cJA

[LadyCentauria]

Goodnight @cJA – dream sweetly

[HindleA]

I would like to thank my house for trebling in value,apparently this makes me hardworking.#itsallbollox.

[StephenDolan]

@StephenDolan

http://www.labour.org.uk/blog/entry/you ... ip-husting" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Thanks for the link, it's more the individual non-hustings events I'm trying with difficulty to trace. Tom Watson was relatively local to me tonight but unfortunately I couldn't make it,Jeremy Corbyn next week.