Friday 23 March 2012


In the wake of the "Granny Tax" fallout, Cameron put Tess of the Horribles into the firing line today, to draw some of the flack away from his beloved Gideon.

It seems from what Tess says, that the Tories have come to the conclusion that what the SNP intends to do in Scotland is the right path for them too, just as they did with the council tax freeze. The trouble is that, yet again, it will involve prices going up and more money going to the Treasury.

Now Gideon the Greasy had already pulled a fast one on the price of alcohol this week, having said that there would be ‘no change’. What he meant was that there would be no change from the Labour policy, which meant that the tax would rise by inflation +. So all the people who thought that no change meant no change in the price, were sadly mistaken. 
Tess announced minimum pricing legislation would be introduced to reduce the mayhem to which many English cities are reduced at weekends and to reduce the cost to the NHS in England (and Wales), after all, in a semi privatised health service it might be their chums who would carry some of that cost. It was surely not an extremely unConservative-like meddling in people's lives and lifestyles. 

Meanwhile, whether or not Cameron liked it, the furore over the "granny tax" continued with someone from the Treasury, called Gauke (must be the minister for making the tea or something) said that it was fair, many pensioners would be better off and they had been largely protected from the coalitions deficit reduction.

Unfortunately for him, or rather for Gideon (as probably no one knows who he is), none other than the highly respected Institute for Fiscal Studies sees it differently. They said that 5 million pensioners would be worse off, losing around £350. They criticised Osborne for trying to dress up "what is clearly a tax increase" as a simplification.
I suspect that the pensioners who will be better off are the ones who will benefit from the reduction of 5% from the top rate of tax paid on income over £150,000: maybe Michael Cain or Paul Daniels.

Have pensioners been protected? Gideon was at pains to tell us how much the pension would increase in April, seeming to think that the pensioners might have forgotten that this was a legal obligation based on the rate of inflation. 

The truth is that pensioners have suffered very badly from this, (and the last) government's policies. Private pensions have been ruined by Gordon Brown's raid on pension funds, and have tumbled even further as a result of quantitative easing. Low interest rates have turned savings into a depreciating asset, paying low interest and losing value by the day.
 In England cheap travel has been cut, and now the NHS, which older people need more than most of the rest of us, is to be privatised.

Is this the Treasury’s idea of protection? 

From minute one I said that it was a silly mistake to hit pensioners in the same budget as he gave away billions to the rich. Osborne will live to regret it.


  1. somepapfaedundeeMarch 23, 2012 11:28 pm

    I do still lurk around your site frequently, but had to briefly 'decloak' and say you really have outdone yourself with hiliarious Osbourne pics!


  2. Ahhhh Pap:

    Where have you been? D'ya know: it's weird. As I was looking for these pictures of Gideon, I was thinking about you, and wondering where you'd got to.

    I've missed your input.

    Anyway, as long as you've got harry's invisibility cloak, I guess you should make the most of it. Lurk away!

    I'm glad you like the latest two pictures of your friend and mine. He's such a nob, isn't he.

  3. If anyone is interested the UK has just signed a tax treaty with Switzerland to "help" crack down on tax evasion and no disclosure,


    All those rich toffs old Etonian and Bullingdon Boys getting found out and having to pay all the taxes that we, of the great unwashed, have nbot option!

    Cue rumbles of faux outrage over these tax dodgers by Cameron and Osborne.

    Except it isn't because there is one feckin big loophole in the Treaty that is helfully uncovered by the EU Observer website which they took from an analysis by a tax campaign group (anti avoidance).

    If you don't have the time here is the relevant section, cut and pasted.

    The section in the Act is as follows

    “An individual resident in the United Kingdom is not considered to be a relevant person with regard to assets of associations of persons, asset structures, trusts or foundations, if it is not possible to ascertain the beneficial owner- ship of such assets, e.g. due to the discretionary nature of the arrangement.”

    The analysis is the follows;

    What that means, in plain English, is that if a UK taxpayer puts their assets in a discretionary trust, for example, then they can keep their assets in a Swiss bank and dodge the Rubik deal entirely: still keeping your assets secret, while paying no tax on it (for more details on how this works, and for a fuller look at all the loopholes, see Section 3.1 here). This clause is so explicit that it is equivalent to planting a flag in the protocol and saying ‘evade me here.’ (And, for the avoidance of doubt, it applies to the new inheritance tax provision too.) Tax advisers up and down the country will be salivating at the prospect of setting up the new structures to help their wealthy clients evade tax this way.

    This is a sweetheart deal, cooked up between Swiss bankers and Dave Hartnett, the disgraced (and now retiring) head of UK Customs and Revenue (HMRC.) This poisonous deal was presented to the UK public immediately ahead of budget day, which means it would get largely ignored by the country’s journalists. And the coverage has consequently been pretty patchy and unquestioning.

  4. tris

    'he gave away billions to the rich. Osborne will live to regret it.'

    How so Osborne 'IS' one of the very rich he wont regret it i spose you mean politically but then he like Cameron are not real politicians just a couple of Etonians having a jolly jape..

    you should read this to give you a flavour of how they operate

  5. I am hearing cash for access to PM is back on the agenda.

  6. Brilliant link Cynical.

    Clever writer makes them fun too.

  7. It seems that everything this government in London does, Wolfie, is about cheating and lying.

    To teh public:

    "Look here you people. Your government has signed this splendid treaty on your behalf. It means that us rich people won't be able to get away with withholding our taxes any more. Won't our rich friends be cross with us...but we don't care, because you, the British public is what is closest to our hearts."

    Note to Old Etonians, Harovians, etc:

    "I say chaps. Jolly old ruse. See you accountants, bung them a handred grand and they'll show you how tyo get out of it... but hush, not a word to the proles. Pip pip."

  8. Gotcha Niko. They really are amazing. It doesn't take chancellors and prime ministers long to fall out does it?

    Osborne wants to be leader. In a little while we'll find that there was an agreement signed in a little restaurant in Paris, that Dave would do 4 years and hand over to Gideon.

    Been there, done that.

    And you guys want to stay as a part of that?????

    Pfffff...yer all mad.

  9. Oh dear Cynical... Surely not!

    I thought all you have to do was give him a ride....!!! He takes cash too?

    On your horse... NIKO

    Oh, and Niko....remember there are ladies reading this.

  10. Done the story CH!