to think George Osborne swanning around in the Royal Box at Wimbledon is wrong?

[LilyBolero]

George Osborne had prime seats in the Royal Box on Centre Court at Wimbledon yesterday, for the Federer/Tsonga match, and the Murray/Lopez match.

This REALLY annoys me. On the day when the Greeks were taking a critical decision, with riots in Athens, and implications for the whole world economy our hirsute Chancellor took the afternoon off.

On the day before hundreds of thousands of workers feel compelled to strike in protest at the prospect of a much grimmer future (whatever the rights or wrongs of that, this isn't a debate about strikes), our Chancellor took the afternoon off.

At a time when we are told ad nauseam that 'We are all in this together', the Chancellor took the afternoon off and went to the best seats at Wimbledon (incidentally, do they have to pay for those seats?).

MPs currently get very generous holidays. I don't suppose a teacher would be able to take the afternoon off to go to Wimbledon (in fact I have friends who have requested this and were given very short shrift). To those who say 'teachers get very good holidays and benefits, they knew about the fixed dates before they went into teaching' I would say 'MPs get very good holidays and benefits, they knew about the fixed dates before they went into politics'.

We pay the Chancellor's salary. I think he should be accountable.

Callisto, nothing to do with personal wealth, everything to do with his policies, and how he presents them and himself.

I was there yesterday (not in the Royal Box I hasten to add) and a man near me shouted "Aren't you needed in the office George?"

He definitely heard and had the grace to look embarrassed...

Perhaps if you are invited to watch in the royal box you can't refuse! Treason? :)

If you are really bothered about this you can email/write to the Treasury and ask them to explain how the chancellor came to be in the royal box yesterday. I'm sure they will tell you it was at the invitation of whatever members of the royal family were present. Royal invitations to Ministers are effectively commands.

"I think he is ok, the consensus in the MN bubble is he is shite - but then this forum is dominated by Labour voters and does not generally reflect the views of the country as a whole."

Last ICM poll I saw had osborne on minus 12% approval rating so I'd be interested to see where you get the impression that the country as a whole thinks he's doing a good job.

btw labour are ahead in the polls too so maybe MN isn't quite the bubble you think it is.

Thanks, LilyB. We are keeping as positive an outlook as we can. And know that there are people in a worse plight.

Of course it's not a 'command' to attend the royal box.

Abra, keeping positive is the main thing, and I hope things improve soon.

"Royal invitations to Ministers are effectively commands."

are you for real!! What absolute nonsense.

"As long as he runs the economy well who cares how much personal wealth he has?"

I could give a shit about his personal wealth (altho I do think it might impact on his ability to empathise with people the real world), I do think he's not that well equipped to run the countries finances tho.

Well if he did have to be there because of an invitation I hope he didn't smile, or look happy. Because everyone else is suffering more than him.

Still at least he wasn't as rich as his hosts if it was the royals. So that's ok then.

[evil]

Callisto - you're missing the point here. Nobody minds rich people, what they mind is rich people who don't give a fuck about anyone - particularly when that person is the Chancellor.

Quite Electra

If the man telling my son that when he is adult he won't get DLA (due to how the new tests work, poor at picking up autism) even though he is too disabled to work then expects us to be OK that he can get away with a jolly when the world collapses around him-

well let's just say that credit rating for sympathy is about as good as that of Athens. He might not be in it together with the cash, we all know that, but that's same for many people (some of whom are friends of mine, some of whom are wankers, some OK like everyone else) but he could not take the piss by obviously not caring.

Shouldn't he be out picking up litter or taking meals to old people or don't they need the Big Society in his neck of the woods.

I care if he's benefitting the rich whilst screwing the poor (wants to remove the 50p tax bracket, but the VAT rise is permanent, corporation tax cuts, not closing loopholes on Philip Green etc).
I care if he doesn't pay his own tax (he featured on a recent docu, take everything with a pinch of salt, but he certainly has a trust fund.
I care if he's cheated on expenses - he certainly broke the rules by flipping his houses (remember he's a multi millionaire), and the LibDems estimated he had benefited by 55k.

And I care if he is so STUPID to think that popping up in the Royal Box at Wimbledon when there are RIOTS in the streets in Greece, and momentous decisions being made, and STRIKES the following day over pension cuts, is a good idea.

And what's more, I care when people who are on average to low means have even what they have cut by someone who will never have to worry about money, and whose main mantra is 'We're all in this together'. Should be followed by 'I'm off to the Royal Box at Wimbledon now, plebs.'

I can't see any basis to assume that he "doesn't give a fuck" about people with less money than him, other than your assumption that he doesn't because he is rich. Presumably if he genuinely "doesn't give a fuck" he wouldn't bother being an MP, the Chancellor of the Exchequer or holding public office. He'd sit back, wait for the baronetcy to plop into his lap and count the dividends from ma and pa flogging wallpaper.

But clearly it's much more fun to label anyone who has money as " a Marie Antionette" (you do know she never said that shit about the cake, I presume? Lies made up to damage her. Happened to people then too).

Georgimama, can't quite get my head round your assertion that becoming an MP automatically proves you 'give a fuck' about the less well off in society.

btw you're onto a bit of a loser trying to paint marie antoinette as a victim of poor PR who in reality did everything she could to fight social injustice.

Her reputation as a spoilt aristo living an insanely extravagant lifestyle off the back of peasant exploitation is well deserved, irrespective of whether she had any quotes falsely attributed to her.

Georgimama. He clearly doesn't give too hoots.
For example, the big cut that is going to affect us is the child benefit cut. That represents 10% of our income, 3 thousand a year. When asked why it was fair that a family on double our income should keep their child benefit when a family like us lost it, he said 'It's tough but fair'.

When I wrote to the Treasury, I received a letter back essentially saying I was too thick to understand the policy. And that it was fair.

So he is implementing a grossly unfair policy (and it's not the worst one, the cuts to the disabled, and those on housing benefit are far worse, but they are not ones that affect me personally), but the amount of tax not received by the treasury through tax evasion by the rich is estimated at £95 billion.

That's the demonstration of how much he cares.

GAH!!!! TWO hoots. TWO. Not too.

He is the man behind the worst cuts this country has seen for generations and obviously favours the rich fortunate members of society. He should live with an ordinary family for a week, do him the world of good. Royal box at Wimbledon, wtf.

Indeed, Lily - there are plenty of rich socialists around who have more virtue in their little finger than George bloody Osbourne could ever imagine.

Your sums don't add up. If CB is 10% of your income at £3,000 per year you can't possibly earn enough to be losing it.

Indeed Georgiemama.

The CB cuts are for those on higher rate tax, those who are seen as " well off2 so erm, just HOW is that attacking the poor?

And why should someone working full time on minimum wage pay tax to those on 40,50, 60 plus K a year can get CB for kids they CHOOSE to have?

The CB policy is totally unfair because it doesn't take joint incomes into account. Single mums who pay higher rate tax are the ones who'll get stung by this because very often they have to pay child care costs which probably swallow up at least a third of their income in order for them to continue to work. It irritates me when people says it's your fault you chose to have kids. Rubbish - who appointed you to decide who is justified in having children and who is not?

Georgimama, you are forgetting tax. 3k lost per year is equivalent to a 5k pay cut. Anyone earning around about 45k (the threshold for losing it) brings home about 30k per year.