He might err towards a BSA Thunderbolt if he was feeling tetchy.They'd surely be in favour of a Strika
He might err towards a BSA Thunderbolt if he was feeling tetchy.They'd surely be in favour of a Strika
So we're ignoring HMRC's legal distinction and going off Wikipedia now? Christ on a bike.
The definition of tax avoidance as being not tax evasion is a common one that has been around a lot longer than 2016.there is no statutory definition of what tax avoidance consists of.
Likewise, what HMRC claim is an illegal scheme often turns out to be otherwise when it finally gets to an independent judge.The line between what is legal and what is not is many things, but it is certainly not "simple".
Just because a tax planner asserts something to be legal doesn't mean it actually is. Just ask Jimmy Carr.
Someone said to me tonight where I am in the Midlands in a seat that voted more than 60% to leave that the Liberal Democrats could stand a change of winning with people annoyed by Brexit.
Wishful thinking given that I am in a leave area and given that the Liberal Democrats have never really had any major presence in the West Midlands or East Midlands and also given that at the last two elections in my constituency the Liberal Democrats have lost their deposit.
But there shouldn't be more than two candidates per constituency, as the voting system is not suitable for use where there are more than two candidates.
Not every constituency has a straight lab/con fight, though. I am in agreement with you in that first past the post needs to be binned, but I wouldn't be happy if the smaller parties simply shrugged and refused to field candidates because the system overall favours the larger parties.
I don't quite follow the logic here. Surely, that implies still standing against the Tories in marginal seats that were marginally lost by the Tories? Which then risks splitting the pro-Brexit vote and failing to regain the marginal seats, defeating the point?
Likewise, what HMRC claim is an illegal scheme often turns out to be otherwise when it finally gets to an independent judge.
Didn't think that one out too well, did he, Uncle Nigel.
How to p**s off 300 prospective candidates, can't see that going down too well.
I'd say any chance that they had of winning more than a handful of seats has all but gone, and perhaps damaged even the chance of the few that they might have got.
There is a reason the recent Faragist announcement was made in Hartlepool. It is a big target seat for them. That said I am sure Nige couldn't get on the A19 and back south quickly enough!
You wouldn't see him for dust if they don't take Hartlepool. I seem to remember he turned and ran pretty quickly when the dead cert that was South Thanet didn't go his way, and even when he got the referendum result he wanted he was on a plane to the US faster than you could say "Nigel, any words....??"
Farage is a coward
Has anyone seen any Manifestos yet?
They're expected in the next few days as I recall? Someone crunched the numbers it takes something like three weeks from the election being announced to them being produced on average.
The Tory Manifesto is a couple of weeks away apparently. Probably another example of the Johnson tendency to do all he can to prevent people looking too closely at what he proposes.
Labour has announced 'Free Fibre Broadband' for ALL. by 2030 Nationalise part of Open Reach and create 'British Broadband'
Sauce :https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2019-50427369
Do we want more players in the@PremierLeague from Brazil, Argentina or Africa compared to the EU? Or more English qualified players to strengthen the national team@FA? What would you rather see? The key opportunity of Brexit is that we will get to decide
Labour has announced 'Free Fibre Broadband' for ALL. by 2030 Nationalise part of Open Reach and create 'British Broadband'
Sauce :https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2019-50427369
Sounds good, full fibre would help to close the productivity gap between the regions and London/South East which exists at the moment. It would make it more viable to run a business from Cornwall or Lincolnshire for example.
Sounds good, full fibre would help to close the productivity gap between the regions and London/South East which exists at the moment. It would make it more viable to run a business from Cornwall or Lincolnshire for example.
No idea how to start a poll, but one question - will you go out and vote or not?
Actually the opposite - it will be delivered to rural areas first.Noting the "by 2030" rider to the comment, you can be sure that Cornwall will be at the end of the availability time period, as is usually the case.
That is exactly what is being offered if you read the policy.The priority should be to get fast/fibre broadband to everyone. Whatever funds are available should be spent on that now. Far too many people/areas don't have good (if any) broadband and that's the problem, not the relatively affordable cost of it for those who can get it. I'd hate this to be yet another initiative where billions are spent on the "easy" bit, i.e. giving some people (who already enjoy good broadband and are able/willing to pay for it) free stuff and a vote buying tactic, but kicking the problem area, i.e. rural broadband, into the long grass.
I live in a village of 6,000 people, just 5 miles from a city of 60,000 people. The mobile signal is pretty poor (so even 3g depends on exactly where you are in the village) and the broadband (even though fibre) is slow and unreliable, simply because the fibre only goes from the exchange to the, few, boxes dotted around within the village. From the junction boxes, it's back to old copper wiring to homes/businesses, sometimes a mile or two away from the box, which is where the speed drops and faults occur. Getting the same crap broadband free of charge isn't helpful. What we need is for the infrastructure to be improved, but I can't see Corbyn's election bribe achieving that for our village, as it would mean every road being dug up to lay new cabling. And no, we don't even have virgin/cabled alternatives either. People need to realise that it's not just isolated farmhouses on the sides of mountains that don't get good internet - our village is within sight of the WCML and M6 so hardly remote, in fact, it really pushes the definition of even being rural.
Labour just can't help themselves offering election bribes - "free" this and that is all they can think. Most people are willing and able to pay for broadband, so it's a massive waste of public (taxpayers) money to make it free for those who don't need it to be free. Spend the sodding money on improving the infrastructure and making it available to all, with some kind of provision for the few who really can't afford it.