| Boris Wins Confidence Vote 21:16 - Jun 6 with 3443 views | SaintNick |
Got about 60% of the vote, so a win but not a decisive one, probably got about 6 months to try and turn it around |  |
| Satisfying The Bloodlust Of The Masses In Peacetime |
| |  |
| Boris Wins Confidence Vote on 21:29 - Jun 6 with 2489 views | cocklebreath |
The fat slimey c&nt will hang on for dear life. |  |
| |
| Boris Wins Confidence Vote on 21:42 - Jun 6 with 2471 views | Heisenberg |
Johnson epitomises everything that is wrong with politics and parliament. There are currently just under 60 MPs being investigated for misconduct with the vast majority being of a sexual nature. There are 2 bye elections coming up. One because the sitting MP is now in jail for a sexual assault and the other because another MP was caught watching porn whilst at work. This just a few years after they were all caught fiddling their expenses. The Chancellor ffs has been caught avoiding paying tax.
It’s time to shut the bars and drop the public school japes with all the false belly laughter and over inflated sense of their own importance. And start with the clown at the top. |  |
| |
| Boris Wins Confidence Vote on 21:51 - Jun 6 with 2457 views | PatfromPoole |
Hassenhutl or Johnson?
Who goes first?
Tough call.
Quite a few parallels though.
Both are helped by a lack of credible available candidates.
Both are in situations of death by a thousand cuts, with widespread apathy amongst the core support. |  |
| |
| Boris Wins Confidence Vote on 22:29 - Jun 6 with 2383 views | kingslandstand1 |
| Boris Wins Confidence Vote on 21:51 - Jun 6 by PatfromPoole |
Hassenhutl or Johnson?
Who goes first?
Tough call.
Quite a few parallels though.
Both are helped by a lack of credible available candidates.
Both are in situations of death by a thousand cuts, with widespread apathy amongst the core support. |
Think that's about right re lack of credible alternative candidates
Better the devil you know and all that. Don't get involved in all the political arguments or whatever on here, but when dealt with the hands from either side of the house who on earth has come up with realistic alternative solutions with what Boris has had to deal with iver the last couple of years!
All everyone does is say what he's done is cr@p!
And his sword to fall on is a birthday cake he didn't even eat!
Still, it was only Brexit to deal with, some virus from China, and potential WW3! |  | | |
| Boris Wins Confidence Vote on 22:42 - Jun 6 with 2367 views | Sadoldgit |
The worst PM in living history and not wanted by 41% of his own party. The man is toast and now it is just a question of when not if. Starmer will be a happy bunny tonight. Roll on the next two by-elections. |  | | |
| Boris Wins Confidence Vote on 23:06 - Jun 6 with 2332 views | Berber |
| Boris Wins Confidence Vote on 22:29 - Jun 6 by kingslandstand1 |
Think that's about right re lack of credible alternative candidates
Better the devil you know and all that. Don't get involved in all the political arguments or whatever on here, but when dealt with the hands from either side of the house who on earth has come up with realistic alternative solutions with what Boris has had to deal with iver the last couple of years!
All everyone does is say what he's done is cr@p!
And his sword to fall on is a birthday cake he didn't even eat!
Still, it was only Brexit to deal with, some virus from China, and potential WW3! |
The whole of the Western world has dealt with Covid,some a bit better, some a bit worse. We have all ended up about the same. No special kudos to Boris. Sure he got the van a little quicker, but we are no better than most of Europe now.
He has delivered a Brexit that gives most Brexiteers what they wanted, but it is still heavily flawed due to his own decision making.
The most worrying thing is that he truly believes that the rules don’t apply to him. Despite the damning Gray Report (political and administrative leadership severely lacking) and the ringing disapproval of 40% of his own MPs, he is trying to give us all the finger and say he has more important things to do. Now we have one of his acolytes slagging off a leading opponent on TV. Our government is getting more and more like the despicable Trump fiasco. A few months ago, an article in a leading, respected UK newspaper showed how everyone who has dealings with him ends up badly damaged. Sadly, it is beginning to look like that means all of us too.
This evening he was trying to bribe his MPs with the promise of tax cuts. Whilst hospital waiting lists are increasing, whilst heart attack victims are being asked to get themselves to hospital, whilst old folk unable to get up off the floor are left all day waiting for an ambulance. No plan, no solution in sight, but tax cuts instead of a proper job with suitable funding. The promised hospitals have hardly begun the planning process and certainly will not be delivered. Lack of political and administrative leadership? I would say so. He simply isn’t delivering on the things that will affect every man, woman and child in the country sooner or later.
Sadly, the lack of credible alternatives doesn’t only apply on the Tory Party. |  | | |
| Boris Wins Confidence Vote on 08:28 - Jun 7 with 2153 views | Bazza |
| Boris Wins Confidence Vote on 21:42 - Jun 6 by Heisenberg |
Johnson epitomises everything that is wrong with politics and parliament. There are currently just under 60 MPs being investigated for misconduct with the vast majority being of a sexual nature. There are 2 bye elections coming up. One because the sitting MP is now in jail for a sexual assault and the other because another MP was caught watching porn whilst at work. This just a few years after they were all caught fiddling their expenses. The Chancellor ffs has been caught avoiding paying tax.
It’s time to shut the bars and drop the public school japes with all the false belly laughter and over inflated sense of their own importance. And start with the clown at the top. |
The Chancellor and his wife have not been ‘caught’ avoiding tax. In any case tax avoidance is legal. Try getting off your class war nonsense and get your facts straight. |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Boris Wins Confidence Vote on 08:37 - Jun 7 with 2136 views | PatfromPoole |
| Boris Wins Confidence Vote on 08:28 - Jun 7 by Bazza |
The Chancellor and his wife have not been ‘caught’ avoiding tax. In any case tax avoidance is legal. Try getting off your class war nonsense and get your facts straight. |
Tax planning is legal.
Tax avoidance is not. | |
| |
| Boris Wins Confidence Vote on 08:38 - Jun 7 with 2133 views | Sadoldgit |
All this talk of the big calls that he got right are mostly rubbish. He hadn’t got Brexit done. The deal was never oven ready. It was a total fudge which is unravelling before our eyes. Whoever follows him with have them unenviable task of trying to deal with the aftermath. His dealing with Brexit was criminal. The only thing he got right was the vaccine roll out but let’s be honest, that was a no brainer. The handling of the Ukraine situation is also a no brainer. Give them plenty of verbal support and supply military aid. Again, a no brainer and an easy win for someone like Johnson who knows a photo opportunity when he sees one. Meanwhile the country is going downhill rapidly with nothing but constant knee jerk reactions on a daily basis. He will limp on for another year, possibly to the next election, whilst we sink further into the mire.
He has surrounded himself with incompetent, sycophants so consequently we have no credible alternatives waiting in the wings.
To say that there is no credible alternative to the Tory Party is nonsense. They are currently pinching anything that the Labour Party come up with as the opposition seem to be the only ones who care about the mess the country is in and finding credible solutions for all. The current windfall tax is a perfect example, something Labour (and the LibDems) have been calling for for ages.
Johnson was never going to go last night but at least now the split within the Tory Party is there for all to see and it is just a question of time before he is outed. Our problem is how much further damage can he do before he is finally dragged out of office. | | | |
| Boris Wins Confidence Vote on 08:41 - Jun 7 with 2130 views | Bazza |
| Boris Wins Confidence Vote on 22:42 - Jun 6 by Sadoldgit |
The worst PM in living history and not wanted by 41% of his own party. The man is toast and now it is just a question of when not if. Starmer will be a happy bunny tonight. Roll on the next two by-elections. |
Quite a challenge to be the worst PM: Did he take us into a war on false info, is he shagging a Cabinet minister, has he lost 3 consecutive votes in the House, nah. No evidence he’s not wanted by 41% of his party though he is not wanted by 41% of his MPs. Soggy you’re getting over excited.
I think he should and will go but he’s hanging on yet again. | | | |
| Boris Wins Confidence Vote on 09:25 - Jun 7 with 2095 views | saint901 |
| Boris Wins Confidence Vote on 08:37 - Jun 7 by PatfromPoole |
Tax planning is legal.
Tax avoidance is not. |
I am - for my sins - a tax adviser of some 40+ years experience, pretty much all of it in the space of enquiries from HMRC.
These vary from routine compliance to major fraud.
I can therefore say with some authority.
Tax planning is legal.
Tax avoidance is legal.
Tax evasion is illegal.
Where are the lines between them?
Avoidance is defined by HMRC as a taxpayer seeking an advantage from the tax rules that Parliament never intended.
(Quite why HMRC assume they know what Parliament intended and the rest of us don't is a continuing source of debate in the Courts).
Evasion is not complying with tax laws in order to gain an advantage. Might be missing something off a return, hiding assets and gains. Most recent campaign from HMRC is looking at restaurants and fast food places who have electronic tills which are "modified" to suppress takings.
(You can find people who offer this service on the net of you know where to look).
In terms of the Chancellor - he was not guilty of avoidance. His wife was not born in the UK and is not domiciled here. She, like tens of thousands of others, is entitled - lawfully - to pay tax only on her UK income. She is not legally obliged to pay UK tax on her non UK income. That is not avoidance - if anything she has done exactly what the law says.
We then have the red top law which says that anybody of status or wealth must have obtained it illegally or by sharp practice and therefore needs to taken down to the level of their readership. Pathetic, envy driven nonsense - but it sells newspapers. | | | |
| Boris Wins Confidence Vote on 09:44 - Jun 7 with 2066 views | saint901 |
Regardless of the spin BJ puts on the vote, he cannot have expected 40% of his MPs to vote against him.
This makes policy making difficult because he knows that a policy which upsets those already disenchanted MPs will give them another opportunity to display their unhappiness by voting with the Opposition.
If the Opposition is smart they will find an issue and force a debate and vote. Perhaps something EU related.
BJ is damaged goods and no way he will lead the Tories into an election if so many of his MPs think he will put them on the "no longer wanted" pile. | | | |
| Boris Wins Confidence Vote on 10:33 - Jun 7 with 2028 views | Bazza |
| Boris Wins Confidence Vote on 08:37 - Jun 7 by PatfromPoole |
Tax planning is legal.
Tax avoidance is not. |
Tax planning and tax avoidance are legal. Tax evasion is illegal. | | | |
| Boris Wins Confidence Vote on 10:41 - Jun 7 with 2015 views | Bazza |
| Boris Wins Confidence Vote on 09:44 - Jun 7 by saint901 |
Regardless of the spin BJ puts on the vote, he cannot have expected 40% of his MPs to vote against him.
This makes policy making difficult because he knows that a policy which upsets those already disenchanted MPs will give them another opportunity to display their unhappiness by voting with the Opposition.
If the Opposition is smart they will find an issue and force a debate and vote. Perhaps something EU related.
BJ is damaged goods and no way he will lead the Tories into an election if so many of his MPs think he will put them on the "no longer wanted" pile. |
Thanks for your very clear summary of the tax definitions. Let’s hope that clears up the confusion/ misleading nonsense that has been repeated on here. | | | |
| Boris Wins Confidence Vote on 12:04 - Jun 7 with 1951 views | dirk_doone |
| Boris Wins Confidence Vote on 22:29 - Jun 6 by kingslandstand1 |
Think that's about right re lack of credible alternative candidates
Better the devil you know and all that. Don't get involved in all the political arguments or whatever on here, but when dealt with the hands from either side of the house who on earth has come up with realistic alternative solutions with what Boris has had to deal with iver the last couple of years!
All everyone does is say what he's done is cr@p!
And his sword to fall on is a birthday cake he didn't even eat!
Still, it was only Brexit to deal with, some virus from China, and potential WW3! |
Credible 
As for actually 'dealing with' anything, there has been no time in my lifetime when everything in the country has declined as rapidly as it has under Johnson's bumbling 'leadership'. It has been a disaster. Nearly everything the government is supposedly responsible for is collapsing around us. [Post edited 7 Jun 2022 12:09]
|  |
| |
| Boris Wins Confidence Vote on 12:37 - Jun 7 with 1897 views | cynicalsaint |
| Boris Wins Confidence Vote on 09:25 - Jun 7 by saint901 |
I am - for my sins - a tax adviser of some 40+ years experience, pretty much all of it in the space of enquiries from HMRC.
These vary from routine compliance to major fraud.
I can therefore say with some authority.
Tax planning is legal.
Tax avoidance is legal.
Tax evasion is illegal.
Where are the lines between them?
Avoidance is defined by HMRC as a taxpayer seeking an advantage from the tax rules that Parliament never intended.
(Quite why HMRC assume they know what Parliament intended and the rest of us don't is a continuing source of debate in the Courts).
Evasion is not complying with tax laws in order to gain an advantage. Might be missing something off a return, hiding assets and gains. Most recent campaign from HMRC is looking at restaurants and fast food places who have electronic tills which are "modified" to suppress takings.
(You can find people who offer this service on the net of you know where to look).
In terms of the Chancellor - he was not guilty of avoidance. His wife was not born in the UK and is not domiciled here. She, like tens of thousands of others, is entitled - lawfully - to pay tax only on her UK income. She is not legally obliged to pay UK tax on her non UK income. That is not avoidance - if anything she has done exactly what the law says.
We then have the red top law which says that anybody of status or wealth must have obtained it illegally or by sharp practice and therefore needs to taken down to the level of their readership. Pathetic, envy driven nonsense - but it sells newspapers. |
Good to clarify the point around seeking an advantage that parliament never intended.
Rishi appears to be happy to exploit a system (that he oversees and can presumably amend) which benefits the super-wealthy. Probably precisely what parliament intended.
He could have chosen to (a) not exploit the opportunity personally; and (b) take steps to close the scheme so others couldn't use it to limit their contributions to the public purse.
He didn't. | | | |
| Boris Wins Confidence Vote on 13:07 - Jun 7 with 1844 views | Bazza |
| Boris Wins Confidence Vote on 12:37 - Jun 7 by cynicalsaint |
Good to clarify the point around seeking an advantage that parliament never intended.
Rishi appears to be happy to exploit a system (that he oversees and can presumably amend) which benefits the super-wealthy. Probably precisely what parliament intended.
He could have chosen to (a) not exploit the opportunity personally; and (b) take steps to close the scheme so others couldn't use it to limit their contributions to the public purse.
He didn't. |
Rishi didn't 'exploit' anything. His wife pays a chunk of money to the HMRC to have non-dom status which is a scheme that has been available for literally centuries. She pays tax on any UK income. | | | |
| Boris Wins Confidence Vote on 13:30 - Jun 7 with 1823 views | DorsetIan |
| Boris Wins Confidence Vote on 09:25 - Jun 7 by saint901 |
I am - for my sins - a tax adviser of some 40+ years experience, pretty much all of it in the space of enquiries from HMRC.
These vary from routine compliance to major fraud.
I can therefore say with some authority.
Tax planning is legal.
Tax avoidance is legal.
Tax evasion is illegal.
Where are the lines between them?
Avoidance is defined by HMRC as a taxpayer seeking an advantage from the tax rules that Parliament never intended.
(Quite why HMRC assume they know what Parliament intended and the rest of us don't is a continuing source of debate in the Courts).
Evasion is not complying with tax laws in order to gain an advantage. Might be missing something off a return, hiding assets and gains. Most recent campaign from HMRC is looking at restaurants and fast food places who have electronic tills which are "modified" to suppress takings.
(You can find people who offer this service on the net of you know where to look).
In terms of the Chancellor - he was not guilty of avoidance. His wife was not born in the UK and is not domiciled here. She, like tens of thousands of others, is entitled - lawfully - to pay tax only on her UK income. She is not legally obliged to pay UK tax on her non UK income. That is not avoidance - if anything she has done exactly what the law says.
We then have the red top law which says that anybody of status or wealth must have obtained it illegally or by sharp practice and therefore needs to taken down to the level of their readership. Pathetic, envy driven nonsense - but it sells newspapers. |
She is only domiciled outside the UK if she does not intend to reside permanently or indefinitely in the UK. In other words, if she intends to leave.
That was the issue. The Chancellor's wife intends to the leave the UK. Does that mean he does too?
A Chancellor with even a hint that he or his family are not long term committed to this country is an issue. The fact that he kept a Green Card too, linking himself to the US, made things even worse.
Sunak is simply too rich to be Chancellor. He's also a colossal drip. | |
| |
| Boris Wins Confidence Vote on 13:34 - Jun 7 with 1820 views | DorsetIan |
Since Cameron won in 2015, this country has been stuck in one long Tory party in-fight.
These people are interested in nobody but themselves and their own petty political power struggles.
Seven years of this cr@p. Seven years of nonsense, waste and decline for the UK. | |
| |
| Boris Wins Confidence Vote on 13:40 - Jun 7 with 1812 views | saints__fan__73 |
| Boris Wins Confidence Vote on 13:34 - Jun 7 by DorsetIan |
Since Cameron won in 2015, this country has been stuck in one long Tory party in-fight.
These people are interested in nobody but themselves and their own petty political power struggles.
Seven years of this cr@p. Seven years of nonsense, waste and decline for the UK. |
But nothing like as bad as it would be if crusty comrade Corbyn had got it... |  |
| |
| Boris Wins Confidence Vote on 13:46 - Jun 7 with 1801 views | DorsetIan |
| Boris Wins Confidence Vote on 13:40 - Jun 7 by saints__fan__73 |
But nothing like as bad as it would be if crusty comrade Corbyn had got it... |
Is that the limit of your ambitions for the country? Not Corbyn.
Yes, I can imagine you're delighted if that's where you're setting the bar. | |
| |
| Boris Wins Confidence Vote on 14:41 - Jun 7 with 1746 views | saint901 |
| Boris Wins Confidence Vote on 12:37 - Jun 7 by cynicalsaint |
Good to clarify the point around seeking an advantage that parliament never intended.
Rishi appears to be happy to exploit a system (that he oversees and can presumably amend) which benefits the super-wealthy. Probably precisely what parliament intended.
He could have chosen to (a) not exploit the opportunity personally; and (b) take steps to close the scheme so others couldn't use it to limit their contributions to the public purse.
He didn't. |
Rishi no more controls the tax system than he does the tides.
Tax policy is set by the Gov't - as a Cabinet - in line with their philosophy.
Tories have for generations encouraged the wealthy to live in, invest in, bring money into the UK. The direct tax benefit may be low as we collect little from non UK citizens but the economic theory is that these people contribute in other ways. (I have nothing more to say about that except that it's hard to type with your fingers crossed behind your back).
The Chancellor has an influence of course but does not dictate policy.
The laws are prepared by HMRC draftsmen and women who work to a brief given them by HM Treasury. Again, no personal influence.
Rishi is a UK citizen and was and is unable to exploit the non dom rules. These rules do not extend to spouses of non doms.
His wife's tax affairs are her own. She is a separate person and can benefit from UK wide tax rules by reason of her circumstances.
So he has NOT chosen to exploit the opportunity personally - because he doesn't qualify and will not take steps to close the non dom status because that is contrary to Gov't policy (not his - the Gov'ts).
His wife has been forced into giving up a perfectly legal status and personally I think that this is equivalent to a lynch mob. | | | |
| Boris Wins Confidence Vote on 14:49 - Jun 7 with 1741 views | saint901 |
| Boris Wins Confidence Vote on 13:30 - Jun 7 by DorsetIan |
She is only domiciled outside the UK if she does not intend to reside permanently or indefinitely in the UK. In other words, if she intends to leave.
That was the issue. The Chancellor's wife intends to the leave the UK. Does that mean he does too?
A Chancellor with even a hint that he or his family are not long term committed to this country is an issue. The fact that he kept a Green Card too, linking himself to the US, made things even worse.
Sunak is simply too rich to be Chancellor. He's also a colossal drip. |
False statements here.
Those with non dom status have a fixed period of time before it runs out - 15 years. Therefore you don't have to "intend to leave". You can simply enjoy the legal status for 15 years and then be deemed by the tax system to be domiciled (for non UK income purposes).
No suggestion that she was thinking of leaving or not.
You also do not choose to "keep a green card". Once issued it remains valid unless you voluntarily give it up. Why would he do that? He knows that political office is not a career and that eventually he will rejoin the general population and why limit himself to the UK employers?
"too rich to be Chancellor"? I don't know what that means but the implication is that the Chancellor should be "one of the people" economically and therefore would make better tax law? See above - he doesn't make tax law.
If holding a ministerial post means that the individual needs to earn average wage (about £29k a year), then we will get average people doing a worse than average job. Bonkers suggestion. | | | |
| Boris Wins Confidence Vote on 14:59 - Jun 7 with 1731 views | DorsetIan |
| Boris Wins Confidence Vote on 14:49 - Jun 7 by saint901 |
False statements here.
Those with non dom status have a fixed period of time before it runs out - 15 years. Therefore you don't have to "intend to leave". You can simply enjoy the legal status for 15 years and then be deemed by the tax system to be domiciled (for non UK income purposes).
No suggestion that she was thinking of leaving or not.
You also do not choose to "keep a green card". Once issued it remains valid unless you voluntarily give it up. Why would he do that? He knows that political office is not a career and that eventually he will rejoin the general population and why limit himself to the UK employers?
"too rich to be Chancellor"? I don't know what that means but the implication is that the Chancellor should be "one of the people" economically and therefore would make better tax law? See above - he doesn't make tax law.
If holding a ministerial post means that the individual needs to earn average wage (about £29k a year), then we will get average people doing a worse than average job. Bonkers suggestion. |
The 15 year rule is a 'deemed domicile' rule. It acts as an effective time limit on the normal rules of domicile, but not replace them.
If you come to the UK with an intention of staying here permanently or indefinitely then you are domiciled here, even within the 15 year period.
You cannot be a non-dom if you intend to remain in the UK permanently or indefinitely. It is implicit in her domicile claim that she did not so intend. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
