national government, like in wartime

[Kirkers]

I think that the coming economic crisis is sufficiently serious to need a coalition government, with Vince Cable as Chancellor.

I have no faith in George Osbourne.

(I have no party affiliation and I am in a constituency where my vote makes no difference anyway).

I think we need lower tax rates because they produce a higher tax yield.

In the global economy, companies will move very quickly to the kindest tax regime. Lots and lots of companies have already left Britain already. WPP have moved to Dublin.

France have introduced tax breaks for entrepreneurs.

(George Bush quote; 'The thing you want to know about the French; they have no word for entrepreneur).

Who would be in the fantasy cabinet beyond VC?

Like in wr time? This IS war time...Afghanistan..Irak..we have two wars on.

Whoever wins the next election is going be responsible for the lots of cuts and therefore will be exceptionally hated so they could share the hatred.

Jack Straw
Kenneth Clarke
Frank Field

or benign dictatorship under Boris.

Whoever wins the next election is going be responsible for the lots of cuts and therefore will be exceptionally hated so they could share the hatred.

Jack Straw
Kenneth Clarke
Frank Field

or benign dictatorship under Boris.

National government

PM Tony Blair (before Iraq)
Chancellor Ken Clarke
Foreign Secretary Ed (not David) Miliband
Home Secretary David Davis
Justice Secretary Jack Straw
Education Secretary Nick Clegg
Defence Secretary William Hague
Health Secretary David Cameron
Welfare Frank Field
Chief Secretary to the Treasury Vince Cable

hmmm just realised I have no women! Maybe Harriet Harman can stay on as deputy PM.

I think a coalition would be very good for everyone.

Fantasy cabinets ... that's a bit of a man's game, innit, like fantasy football?

Although I might vote for Daniel Craig as Culture Sec if he could be on TV more as a result.

Fantasy policies though, that is another matter.

I might think some up.

longfingernail - I like your cabinet list. The only thing I really would disagree with is Tony Blair as PM (or indeed there at all).

I do think Cameron would be a better leader of a consensual team of competent experts as your cabinet would be although not driving policy.

That would leave a space at health and a woman like Justine Greening in there would be good. Trained as an accountant and has an MBA and has worked in big organisations at a proper job. Would be tasked with delivering cost efficiency and better management organisation in the NHS. She comes across as highly competent and very able whenever I hear her speak.

Swap Theresa May for Justine Greening comes across as another bit of vacuous tory totty whenever I hear her speak. and lets face it, every other person has an MBA these days.

I'd put tony blair as welfare and bring back betty boothroyd as pm!

Vince cable would be great

Nick Soames for defence (as he understands it) and William Hague for PM - no Harman at all.

Education Charles Clarke, as he was actually a very good Sec of State for Education when I was teaching and let us do the job. He also championed the cause of some of the misunderstood subjects like mine.

Boris understands that lower taxes for the city of London is the only chance this country has to pay its bills.

If I am your average high net worth individual, suppose I am a Spanish born, American educated investment banker working for a Swiss bank in the City of London, then could you try to see it from my point of view?

If I earn £2m pa, then that represents a lot of money in taxes for whichever country in which I choose to reside for tax purposes.

In the same way that British savers might switch banks, I might look around at the tax rates payable.

If Switzerland and Dublin offer me better value, then off I go.

If, for example, London offered lower tax rates, then the aforementioned Spanish-born, US educated investment banker's bank might find it worthwhile staying in London and providing the British Treasury with about half of all their filthy gains.

High tax payers will gravitate towards the lowest tax regime. It's not right, it's not wrong, it's what happens.

Lower taxes make more money for the Treasury.
I would be delighted for anyone to prove this to be wrong.

Our loss is the gain of Dublin, Geneva....

Not Hungary. Geneva.

You're right that the quality of life in the city is important.

On the bright side, when all those pesky tax-paying foreigners go, house prices will come down.

The taxes paid in the City of London are almost the only thing keeping this economy afloat. The very last thing we watn to do is tax them to Geneva.

George Monbiot/Phillippe Sands for Secretary of State for Environment