Tony Blair and the £8million tax mystery

[Smiler.]

JonRB said:

Neither Foot nor Kinnock helped Labour be electable. Blair was just the greasy snake oil charlatan showman they needed to slime their way back into power.

Mind you, the Conservatives were virtually unelectable by then so it was kind of a Perfect Storm.

Yeah, it was all that Tory sleaze that the lefties wiped away, never to be seen again.

Oh, wait.......

[Globs]

Smiler. said:

JonRB said:

Neither Foot nor Kinnock helped Labour be electable. Blair was just the greasy snake oil charlatan showman they needed to slime their way back into power.

Mind you, the Conservatives were virtually unelectable by then so it was kind of a Perfect Storm.

Yeah, it was all that Tory sleaze that the lefties wiped away, never to be seen again.

Oh, wait.......

With Smith in charge it may have been the case, compared to Bliar and Brown he was a guiding angel as pure as the driven snow. I always regret that Smith died, the UK would have been so much better had he lived.

[Adrian W]

they were trying to reserect this on LBC this morning, asking how he's so efficient with his own finances but manged to completely screw the country, made me smile, but he will get away with it, unless someone can prove he has broken the law.

[Asterix]

Smiler. said:

JonRB said:

Neither Foot nor Kinnock helped Labour be electable. Blair was just the greasy snake oil charlatan showman they needed to slime their way back into power.

Mind you, the Conservatives were virtually unelectable by then so it was kind of a Perfect Storm.

Yeah, it was all that Tory sleaze that the lefties wiped away, never to be seen again.

Oh, wait.......

yeah, that went the same time a 'boom & bust'.

[oyster]

Countdown said:

And that's why the Tories have roared back with a massive majority.....oh wait, they haven't

Could you answer a simple question then.

How come the Tories don't have a majority when they received a much larger share of the vote in 2010 than Labour did in 2005?

Is it not because of biased electoral boundaries?

[JonRB]

oyster said:

Countdown said:

And that's why the Tories have roared back with a massive majority.....oh wait, they haven't

Could you answer a simple question then.

How come the Tories don't have a majority when they received a much larger share of the vote in 2010 than Labour did in 2005?

Is it not because of biased electoral boundaries?

Indeed. And also don't forget that if Labour had gained as many votes as the Conservatives did in the 2010 election, they would have stayed in power with a majority.

---

gerrymander [ˈdʒɛrɪˌmændə]
vb
1. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) to divide the constituencies of (a voting area) so as to give one party an unfair advantage
2. to manipulate or adapt to one's advantage

[Murph7355]

oyster said:

...

How come the Tories don't have a majority when they received a much larger share of the vote in 2010 than Labour did in 2005?

Is it not because of biased electoral boundaries?

To be fair the Tories can't moan about that - both of the main parties have been playing that game for decades. I believe this is why the LibDems have been banging on about PR for so long...

[Countdown]

oyster said:

Countdown said:

And that's why the Tories have roared back with a massive majority.....oh wait, they haven't

Could you answer a simple question then.

How come the Tories don't have a majority when they received a much larger share of the vote in 2010 than Labour did in 2005?

That's a reflection of the "system / the way the voters are distributed. I doubt very much that it's mainly down to any deliberate action by Labour (although I'm sure they would have tried to benefit from it), I think its always been like that. And as another poster has pointed out, that is why the LibDems don't get the number of seats their proportion of the vote theoretically entitles them to.

Anybody remember Dame Shirley Porter?

[turbobloke]

Countdown said:

...I doubt very much that it's mainly down to any deliberate action by Labour (although I'm sure they would have tried to benefit from it), I think its always been like that. And as another poster has pointed out, that is why the LibDems don't get the number of seats their proportion of the vote theoretically entitles them to.

Anybody remember Dame Shirley Porter?

No excuses on that score - house sales and evictions in Westminster wasn't it - very much a localised disgrace.

However to find an example of election gerrymandering on a national scale involving the only instance in the last hundred years up, when there has been direct political interference in the work of the Boundary Commission, you must look to Labour and Jim Callaghan as Home Sec. Even so, they lost. Nice.

As to your doubt, keep doubting

[otolith]

obob said:

Hmmm if it was any other rich bloke who had not spent a career banging on about social justice and redistributing other people's wealth PH would be back slapping him all the way to the bank.

It's the hypocrisy that people object to, though to be fair to Blair I think he spent much of his time in power restraining the rest of his party (and Gordon) from really going to town. It didn't take Brown long to raise the top rate of income tax, something Blair had been vetoing for years.

[Asterix]

Mermaid said:

RYH64E said:

Some of us are just wondering how on earth he managed to persuade his accountants to sign off nearly £11m of operating expenses on a £12m turnover consultancy business!

Because he paid his accountant a lot money?

Around £11m by the looks of things.

Anyway - amazing how one so astute with his own finances could bankrupt a country.

[Zod]

Globs said:

Smiler. said:

JonRB said:

Neither Foot nor Kinnock helped Labour be electable. Blair was just the greasy snake oil charlatan showman they needed to slime their way back into power.

Mind you, the Conservatives were virtually unelectable by then so it was kind of a Perfect Storm.

Yeah, it was all that Tory sleaze that the lefties wiped away, never to be seen again.

Oh, wait.......

With Smith in charge it may have been the case, compared to Bliar and Brown he was a guiding angel as pure as the driven snow. I always regret that Smith died, the UK would have been so much better had he lived.

Lucky for his image that he died. He'd have been catastrophic. He would not have removed Clause 4, so it would have been a return to 60s/70s Labour government. He might have been more honest morally and intellectually than Blair and Brown, but he would have brought nothing new to British politics.

[otolith]

Asterix said:

Anyway - amazing how one so astute with his own finances could bankrupt a country.

That is assuming that there is some kind of smoke and mirrors and that he didn't actually manage to run his affairs so inefficiently that 11/12ths of income was wasted...

[Asterix]

But the chances are he (Smith)/Labour might have only lasted one term had they implemented old school Labour practices from the off so the long term damage wouldn't have been done.

[JonRB]

otolith said:

That is assuming that there is some kind of smoke and mirrors and that he didn't actually manage to run his affairs so inefficiently that 11/12ths of income was wasted...

11/12ths of the turnover of that particular company which is one of a web of companies that he trades though.

[Asterix]

JonRB said:

otolith said:

That is assuming that there is some kind of smoke and mirrors and that he didn't actually manage to run his affairs so inefficiently that 11/12ths of income was wasted...

11/12ths of the turnover of that particular company which is one of a web of companies that he trades though.

I'm assuming that there are plenty of other companies operating at near 100% profit that can't be touched.

[RYH64E]

Asterix said:

JonRB said:

otolith said:

That is assuming that there is some kind of smoke and mirrors and that he didn't actually manage to run his affairs so inefficiently that 11/12ths of income was wasted...

11/12ths of the turnover of that particular company which is one of a web of companies that he trades though.

I'm assuming that there are plenty of other companies operating at near 100% profit that can't be touched.

But he's said that all of his companies are UK registered for tax purposes...

Heres hoping HMRC put their best people on his case, after they've finished with the Dale Farm lot.

[Mermaid]

RYH64E said:

But he's said that all of his companies are UK registered for tax purposes...
.

I trust him as far as i can throw an elephant.

[Asterix]

RYH64E said:

Asterix said:

JonRB said:

otolith said:

That is assuming that there is some kind of smoke and mirrors and that he didn't actually manage to run his affairs so inefficiently that 11/12ths of income was wasted...

11/12ths of the turnover of that particular company which is one of a web of companies that he trades though.

I'm assuming that there are plenty of other companies operating at near 100% profit that can't be touched.

But he's said that all of his companies are UK registered for tax purposes...

Hhahahahahahahahaahahaa

[Smiler.]

Asterix said:

Smiler. said:

JonRB said:

Neither Foot nor Kinnock helped Labour be electable. Blair was just the greasy snake oil charlatan showman they needed to slime their way back into power.

Mind you, the Conservatives were virtually unelectable by then so it was kind of a Perfect Storm.

Yeah, it was all that Tory sleaze that the lefties wiped away, never to be seen again.

Oh, wait.......

yeah, that went the same time a 'boom & bust'.

Mmmmm, another of the leftie liars greats.


Where's that thread about never getting tired of punching faces - time for a bump