Labour - is there any hope left?

He's literally said both more than once in the last 5 minutes.

Even Emily Thornberry almost lost her rag with him.

Ah yes, the get out jail free card of "can't remember".

If these high ranking people have such bad memories, they should never have been given such senior positions.

It's like the old Chief Fire Officer for London who, at the enquiry, "couldn't remember" anything about her attendance at the Grenfell Tower Fire. Funny how the highest ranking fire officer couldn't remember anything due to the trauma etc., yet most of the lowly fire(wo)men who actually fought the fire and rescued people had really good recollections of what they did, what they were told, etc.

I’m listening and haven’t heard him say anything of the sort.

Yep it’s all pointing to Starmer still, Barton was good, committee probably realising the sacking of OR was off.

Surprised they need a vote to get KS there which Labour will avoid. They shouldn’t if there’s nothing to hide.

Anyone else watching Morgan McSweeney say he can't remember anything and doesn't know anything at the foreign affairs select committee?

This guy is extremely unimpressive - particularly compared to Olly Robbins last week - and he was Labour's number one adviser over the last few years

I completely agree with the last paragraph. Thank you for articulating it far better than I did.

None we are going to end in a extreme left or right wing nightmare.

Well I'm sure that many Labour voters will think it's a great achievement that over 100 private schools have closed since they introduced VAT on education, to say nothing of the thousands of children who are no longer able to access education it the place of their choice.

It's too complicated to change now. We've had hollow promises of simplification for decades, but it just gets worse. Trouble is that politicians don't understand it themselves so aren't in a position to reform it. HMRC and Treasury staff are "silo-d" into their own specific areas so are unable to see the broader picture so can't do anything that crosses over from one area of tax/benefits to another. We even have different definitions of being in a "trade/business" between capital gains tax and inheritance tax because it was different departments/people writing the tax law and they didn't agree a common definition between themselves, meaning a business can be a "business" for capital gains tax but not for inheritance tax and/or vice versa in some situations! Utter madness. Tax and benefits are now simply too complex for any meaningful simplification. We've gone too far. All that can be done is re-arranging the Titannic deckchairs to "tweak" things to chip away around the edges, but even doing that, there are howls of anguish from affected people that always seem to get a disproportionate amount of media attention causing U turns and making politicians even more reluctant to change things.

@Attenboroughsmistress "would be amazing if they ran on a “simplification” pledge and just ironed out the whole lot - stupid taxes like stamp duty, the 100k cliff edge, the “mansion tax” which is literally a tax on a standard 3 bedroom terraced house in some parts of London… they need to look at everything as a whole and just fix it all. Make things simple and iron out perverse incentives."

yes

Why does no one do that? Do they think they'll lose votes

I used to think it was because no one could be bothered and then they just tinker around the edges with the system

But then I realised if they announce as simplification people will probably panic and just assume they will pay higher tax

Nice idea but impossible in practice. "Wealth" is highly subjective and impossible to accurately value. Do you really think HMRC could make a decent stab at valuing everyone's wealth every few years? How much a house or farm or business or unquoted shares is highly subjective. Yes, we can make a good attempt at houses, especially if similar houses have recently been sold, but lots aren't comparable and how do you value a house that's not been looked after for years as it's "value" is clearly significantly less to the next door house that's been fully refurbished. It's easy enough for people with quoted shares as values are published, but what about small unquoted businesses? What proof is there that someone doesn't have a million pounds of gold sovereigns under their bed or in fact a million pounds in bank notes under their bed? Or who buy antiques, paintings, vintage cars etc as investments? The whole thing would become an absolute nightmare and the appeal courts would be tied up for years with appeals and challenges.

Far better to concentrate on the income from wealth and tax ALL sources of income at the same rates, whether from wages, dividends, pensions, or capital gains. Scrap NIC for a start and increase income tax. Scrap CGT and apply income tax rates on all income/gains at the same rates. Scrap all the different reliefs for different classes of income. Just have a starting rate, higher rate and additional rate, taxing ALL income and gains. That way someone earning a million from wages would pay the same taxes as someone earning a million from an investment portfolio. Someone with a wage of £20k pays the same tax as a pensioner with total income from pensions and savings interest of £20k. Simples.

I can see people have made good list of what's happened. That's a plus.

And also, I've heard stuff about NHS so that's good

I just feel that we are not seeing any pluses from them being in power - I do think the war situation would've been more complicated but I'm not sure if we can credit Starmer for that, maybe more luck than judgement

what are the specific benefits from the deals with EU and India?

On the contrary I’m more than happy to own up to being wrong. The fact is that most high net worth individuals’ income is passive and there are a myriad of ways to avoid tax if you don’t pay through PAYE. It’s not my problem if posters to this thread are unable to see the difference between high earners who have no option but to pay tax and those in receipt of passive incomes when it’s easily avoided.

I didn’t say these people don’t pay any tax, I said they tend not to pay income tax.

There is some irony in people leaving because they object to immigration.

“Can’t you just admit you were wrong?”

Never going to happen.

unnecessary post deleted

He paid as shedload of tax yet you claimed they don't pay it.

Can't you just admit you were wrong?

I already covered tax avoidance.

High net worth are generally also high earners unless their assets are fixed and they don't sell them, which isn't many of them.

You can try taxing wealth if you like but it's better to have a Sunak here paying half a million than not here and paying nothing. These people are highly mobile.

Yep.

I love this article, it sums this up:
Britain’s desperate need for Keir Badenoch

You're embarrassing yourself.

Re-read what you're posting.

Sunak paid virtually no income tax.

He paid 23%. Perhaps you should take your own advice.

You said:

High net worth individuals tend not to pay income tax. And we don’t tax wealth in any meaningful way.

Then you posted Rishi's tax statement showing that he paid effective rate of 37% of income tax.

I appreciate you gravitate to grabbing headlines without reading and analysing the text.
He also paid 20% of capital gain tax, as he should according to tax rates at the time.

If your real intent was to say that capital gain tax should be equalised with income tax, then I'd encourage you to do some reading to understand why they are different and what will surely happen if they aren't anymore.

ETA: it's fascinating to read views about tax regime from a person who doesn't understand what income tax is.

He paid 23%. High earners - as opposed to high net wealth individuals - can find themselves paying a marginal rate of 60%. Ergo we tax income not wealth. The sooner we start taxing wealth the better and stop giving the Sunaks of this world an easy ride.

That spreadsheet explicitly states that Sunak paid over half a million pounds tax on his income.

Is anyone is interested in the Representation of the People Bill which is moving through Parliament? The country is at a rare crossroads. The Bill already proposes major changes - from lowering the voting age to 16 to modernising voter registration - but it doesn't go far enough on the issue that underpins everything else: money in politics.

The Representation of the People Bill is already opening up the electoral system for debate. That makes this the perfect moment to push for a deeper clean‑up one that tackles not just how people vote, but how political power is financed.

Campaigners argue that if Parliament is already rewriting the rules of democracy, it should also confront the uncomfortable truth that money buys access, and access shapes outcomes.

A Cleaner, Fairer Future Is Possible

The UK has reformed its democracy before - expanding the vote, modernising elections, and strengthening oversight. Each time, change happened because the public pushed for it.
Today, the challenge is different but just as urgent: ensuring that political power cannot be bought.

I came across this petition which I signed - it doesn't have many signatures yet...but it looks very interesting would be keen to see it get to parliament!

Take a look...https://wakeupgb.co.uk/petition

This thread is hilarious. Lefties all fighting to find reasons why Two Tier Kier is successful. He is the worst prime minister I have ever seen. This government is a joke. And no, I won’t be voting Reform at the next GE - but I also will not vote for this bunch of clowns in a month of sundays.