Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Brexit
Original poster

Andrea Leadsom - please stand for leadership!

684 replies

Millyonthefloss2 · 29/06/2016 10:46

Anyone agree?

OP posts:
Vri123 · 05/07/2016 20:22

Stephen Crabb has dropped out now. Its down to 3. I wonder if Michael Gove or Andrea Leadsom will be the next to go? The remainers seem to prefer AL over MG, which implies they think Michael Gove is more of threat to TM??

UnderTheGreenwoodTree · 05/07/2016 20:24

Oh god, anyone but Gove!

My choice (of a very bad bunch) would be May - but I'm wondering if she will suffer the curse of the front-runner.

Vri123 · 05/07/2016 20:26

Both Crabb and Liam fox have backed May. I am not surprised by Stephen Crabb, but Liam Fox?? Why?

roundaboutthetown · 05/07/2016 20:27

Michael Gove is more of a threat to the entire country. Grin He is the man who consulted lots of experts on education and then ignored them. I don't see that zealot doing anything but wind up the whole of the rest of Europe to the point they would rather damage their own trade to punish the UK than come to any agreements with him.

ManonLescaut · 05/07/2016 20:27

It was the public we were discussing. I've not seen anyone claim corporations were confused about the law.

ManonLescaut · 05/07/2016 20:29

I think they just think Gove is a twit like the rest of the country.

Vri123 · 05/07/2016 20:29

SwedishEdith its a secret ballot.
You can get an indication here

ManonLescaut · 05/07/2016 20:29

A backstabbing non-expert consulting twit.

roundaboutthetown · 05/07/2016 20:31

Well exactly - and the public are interested in what they think the law should be, not what it actually says. They therefore have no need to worry about whether something is technically avoidance or evasion, do they? Besides which, even the public know that multinationals negotiate their tax bills with HMRC, whereas the public can't even get through to them on the phone... so it's not surprising tax law is held in such general contempt.

SnowBells · 05/07/2016 20:43

OK. I wasn't a fan of AL, but tried getting feedback from people who worked with her. So far... none.

So none of the PMs actually appeal... what shambles.

Girlgonewild · 05/07/2016 20:45

Looked up AL at Companies House. Founded a PIP charity - they provide help to babies in first 2 years. Also her husband and 2 sons' trusts own a property company with £1.6m of properties - presumably buy to let and about £400k cash in the company. Nothing wrong with any of that.

ManonLescaut · 05/07/2016 20:51

Well exactly - and the public are interested in what they think the law should be, not what it actually says. They therefore have no need to worry about whether something is technically avoidance or evasion, do they?

Agreed, hence the confusion. And my disagreement with your original point that 'the public are not that confused, they just don't approve of all forms of tax avoidance'. Smile

roundaboutthetown · 05/07/2016 20:53

My point still stands - the public do not approve of all forms of tax avoidance! All as in not all of them, not as in none of them...

roundaboutthetown · 05/07/2016 20:53

I would otherwise have said they do not approve of any...

TulipsInAJug · 05/07/2016 20:54

Earlier this year she warned that the government's new 'national living wage' would be a magnet for migrants to the UK.

Doesn't she have a point, though?

roundaboutthetown · 05/07/2016 20:55

And the fact they don't care whether what they disapprove of is avoidance or evasion is irrelevant, as they aren't confused about what they don't like...

roundaboutthetown · 05/07/2016 20:58

Yes, what we need is a workforce on such low wages that no migrant would touch us with a barge pole. Grin We must lower the income of doctors, nurses, teachers and any other profession which might attract migrants.

ManonLescaut · 05/07/2016 21:04

Just to be clear I was disagreeing with your claim 'the public are not that confused', I shouldn't have included the second half of your sentence.

TulipsInAJug · 05/07/2016 21:06

We must lower the income of doctors, nurses, teachers and any other profession which might attract migrants.

Erm, she was talking about the National Living Wage, which wouldn't apply to doctors, nurses or teachers.

roundaboutthetown · 05/07/2016 21:09

I was aware of that... Grin

ManonLescaut · 05/07/2016 21:13

WineWine

roundaboutthetown · 05/07/2016 21:13

Just to be clear, I don't think the public are confused about tax avoidance, because I think they aren't interested in whether it is technically avoidance or technically evasion, or was once avoidance and is now evasion.

roundaboutthetown · 05/07/2016 21:21

To put it another way, you only tend to get confused if you are trying to work something out. If you don't need to work that something out in order to form your opinion, then you aren't confused at all, you have just ignored something that is irrelevant to your sense of right and wrong.

ManonLescaut · 05/07/2016 21:33

Are you not as bored of this as I am?

You originally said the 'public weren't that confused' and that 'Tax avoidance=legal. Tax evasion=illegal'.

I didn't agree with that. I think quite often the public are confused between what counts as avoidance and evasion, and thus between what is legal and illegal.

You now say they 'As for the general prublic...they are more interested in what they perceive to be "right" than what the letter of the law says.'

'the public are interested in what they think the law should be, not what it actually says. They therefore have no need to worry about whether something is technically avoidance or evasion'

I do agree with that.

Now, who wants a drink?

Inkanta · 05/07/2016 21:37

Yes - I 'll have a drink - can we move on!

Swipe left for the next trending thread