What a bizarre article
Public sector pensions disappear on death and cannot be bequests to kids, so the effective tax rate (if you insist on doing like this)…
…is 100%
"We're withholding our endorsement because our owner is frightened of government retaliation if Donald Trump wins" is a more forceful and eloquent statement than any newspaper editorial ever written.
Zaf is a taxi driver. He’s born and bred Sunderland
He broke down when he described the hate he’d received
This was seconds before racial slurs were thrown, telling him to “go back to his own country”
A short clip. Hard, but important, so please watch
Not again! I have NOT given my permission to be used in political adverts. This is NOT an endorsement by me in any way. I maintain strict party neutrality and am unhappy at the weaponizing of my reputation in this way.
While this isn't as bad as the first terrible representation – which said it this about tax - there's still a misdirection. As I’ve already stated, in that private conversation I was referring to Labour hoping to make a positive change I’ve been campaigning for, but it didn’t want to lock it in the manifesto as it can’t promise to deliver.
NO party’s manifesto tells the full story. ALL parties have things they hope to do but that aren’t in manifestos – as they can’t guarantee to deliver. The idea that Labour is an outlier for that is preposterous.
Ok, so it's been reported Keir Starmer, if he becomes PM, wants to clock off at 6pm to spend time with his kids.
The thing is, that's not what he said.
(He only wants to ringfence Friday evening and he accepts that time might get disturbed).
Herewith the verbatim transcript:
“They’re all the same” is not only dangerous, it’s nonsense. To paraphrase Gordon Brown, when “anyone says that politics can’t make a difference then look what we have achieved together from 1997 to 2010” and compare it to the last 14 years 🧵
A gentle reminder that the phrase 'supermajority' is meaningless in U.K. politics. There is nothing you can do with a 350-seat majority that you can't do with an 80-seat majority.
This has likely been the worst parliament for living standards growth for at least 70 years. Going back even further, incomes fell in 1951 (a short parliament) and over 1918-22.
Debate: Sunak on state pension is very misleading. The state pension will not be taxed for the first time in history because it is already taxed and 1.6million people had a state pension last year that is more than the personal tax allowance of £242 a week. This year it’s more.
NO WHERE in this comment do I talk about taxes. And the policy that I discussed (i will keep private as it was private) was NOT about taxes, or tax rises, it was about something that would be a positive change.
It's easy to predict Nigel Farage's grift for the next 5 years, whether or not he wins Clacton.
He will focus on the "extraordinary injustice" of getting millions of votes and almost no seats - something that has been happening to the parties such as the LD for decades.
Never mind that it's an artefact of our FPTP system. He will spin it as some giant conspiracy to keep Reform out of power. And his supporters will lap it up.
Now, FPTP isn't fit for purpose. We need PR. But that's not the same as inventing a non-existent conspiracy to explain away why the number of seats you won bears no relation to the number of votes.
And the great thing about this grift from his POV is that it pushes against an open door. People already don't trust politics and politicians. And this will be the final "proof" they need that the system is corrupt and rigged.
We can expect the RW press and GB News to pivot behind this ludicrous crusade too. Why? Because with the Tories reduced to a shadow of their former numbers, nothing that they say or do will have any bearing on what happens. But the media thrive on outrage and clickbait. And a giant conspiracy aimed at keeping Reform out of power ticks all the boxes in that respect.
I hope I'm wrong. I fear I'm not.
A lot of candidates often bet on themselves to lose. For many it’s a bit of a tradition. Likewise if Jack bet without prior knowledge of the date hard to see what could be improper, albeit perhaps politically unwise. Danger of descent into moral panic.
The @Conservatives shared a clip appearing to show Rachel Reeves struggling to respond to a question about Labour’s economic plans.
But footage of the full interview shows there were technical issues on the line. #GE2024
Read more 👇
https://t.co/gXUfzrbrfe
Just weird to hear Cameron say "wokery" considering his USP back in the day was meant to be "I'm a Tory who isn't horrified by social change" and one of the achievements he listed when he resigned was same sex marriage