Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


T in the Park

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

'Non dom' tax status row over new chief with £1.1m salary



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 20 February 2008
THE £90,000-a-month new boss appointed to save Northern Rock has non-domicile tax status, it was reported last night, as MPs prepared to push through emergency legislation to nationalise the bank.
Ron Sandler, who will earn £1.1 million a year as he fights to save taxpayers from having to bear the brunt of the Northern Rock collapse, may pay tax only on his UK income, not on his worldwide wealth.

Mr Sandler was brought up in Zimbabw
e and has a German passport.

Although he has lived and worked in the UK for about 20 years, he is thought to have non-domicile status, sheltering his overseas income and assets from UK tax liability.

The revelation was seized on by opposition politicians, with Vince Cable, the Liberal Democrat treasury spokesman, accusing the government of finding a "search engine" that seemed to deliver "banana skins to fall on".

"Sir Ron Sandler is now presumably becoming the second best paid person in Newcastle after Michael Owen but at least Michael Owen pays his taxes here," Mr Cable told the Commons during a debate on Northern Rock.

"All the government's favourite businessmen, including Sir Richard Branson and now Ron Sandler, appear to have so little commitment to the country let alone the government that they are prepared to pay their taxes somewhere else."

Ann Godbehere, Mr Sandler's £75,000-a-month chief financial officer, is currently said to be resident for tax purposes in Switzerland, and is also likely to adopt non-dom status.

A spokesman for the Treasury said it would be illegal to disclose the tax status of individuals but he added: "If they were non-doms, we would be quite relaxed about that. We have got a tax regime which allows people not domiciled in the UK to come here and work.

"That is what has built London into a leading financial centre. Regardless of what people's position is, they pay tax on their income in the UK."

But the reports put pressure on ministers to make sure the bosses of Northern Rock became resident taxpayers.

Paul Kenny, general-secretary of the GMB union, said: "To end this severe embarrassment, the Chancellor has no alternative but to ask Mr Sandler to end his non-dom tax status and become a resident taxpayer, otherwise Mr Sandler's position becomes untenable."

Sir Howard Davies, a former deputy governor of the Bank of England and CBI chief, said the City had suffered "reputational damage" because of the Northern Rock debacle. He said uncertainty over the bank's future and the taxation of non-doms was a "nasty cocktail".

The tax status of the bank's new boss underscores the controversy surrounding non-doms.

Labour has been eager to shake off its old image of being unfriendly to business, but taunts from private-equity bosses that they pay less tax than their cleaners has put pressure on ministers to ensure the tax system is fairer.

In the autumn, when speculation was mounting that Gordon Brown would call a snap election, the Tories unveiled an eyecatching proposal for a £25,000 tax on the super-rich or non-domiciles who live in Britain but did not pay tax on their overseas earnings.

The plan was designed to take a fee from foreign tax-avoiders and use it to cut inheritance tax, also a Tory policy.

Six days later, Alistair Darling, the Chancellor, adopted the plan and announced he would place a £30,000 levy on non-doms who have lived in Britain for seven years. Last week, the Chancellor was accused of watering down his plans after Revenue and Customs issued a "clarifying note" to say that overseas income would not be taxed.

Mr Darling will still impose a £30,000 fee but the Treasury will not ask for full earnings details.

BROWN STAFFS BOARD WITH ALLIES

GORDON Brown has been accused of wanting to control Northern Rock, after it emerged that one of his favourite civil servants was now on the bank's board.

Tom Scholar, a former chief of staff at Number 10 who is now at the Treasury, was made a non-executive director of Northern Rock.

Philip Hammond, the shadow chief secretary to the Treasury, said: "This blows apart Gordon Brown's promise to run Northern Rock at arm's length. How can he claim that Northern Rock will be run free from political interference? "

Other non-executive directors include Philip Remnant, appointed by Alistair Darling, the Chancellor, to chair the Shareholder Executive, which manages relations between the government and major public-owned businesses.

Stephen Hester, the chief executive of British Land Company, whose subsidiary, British Land Property Advisers, donated £1,500 to the Scottish Labour Party last year, is also on the board.

The government has stressed it will not be involved in day to day decisions over the running of the bank.





The full article contains 822 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 19 February 2008 9:17 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
 
1

Jimmy the Pie,

20/02/2008 00:07:36
Poor Comrade Broon - it just seems to go from bad to worse. Good.
Vote SNP when the time comes.
2

Roberta Burns,

20/02/2008 00:23:56
Another old pal paid off handsomely.
3

,

20/02/2008 00:34:29
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
4

GalacticCannibal,

Murrieta, CA........captured from Mexico 1845 20/02/2008 01:52:06
'Non dom' tax status row over new chief with £1.1m salary
------------------------------------------

Dude Ron Sandler cares nothing about Northern Rock customers.
Now he has his hands on ur tax pounds.

GC
5

,

20/02/2008 02:29:35
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
6

Tatties ower the side,

Johannesburg 20/02/2008 03:42:34
"......may pay tax only on his UK income, not on his worldwide wealth. "

Nothing unusual about this. That is standard UK tax law.

Only the US and a few other countries (like South Africa) tax on worldwide income.
7

KampungHighlander,

Jakarta 20/02/2008 05:44:57
The article says "taunts from private-equity bosses that they pay less tax than their cleaners". That would have been fun to see. Middle aged men in pin striped suits standing outside Westminster blowing raspberry's at Alistair Darling chanting "I pay less tax than my cleaner!" Does any one know if this made its way onto YouTube?
8

KampungHighlander,

Jakarta 20/02/2008 06:04:05
#9 To those few other Countries add Canada, Australia,
UK, France, Germany, Italy, etc. etc. etc. The US in fact taxes you even if you are non-resident but still maintain citizenship. The UK is unique in its willingness to allow non domiciled residents to escape tax on worldwide income. They do however like to tax non residents who have been unable to escape UK domicile when they die.
9

donald anderson it's me,

20/02/2008 08:03:40
Has he ever donated to the Lumpen Party and when is his Peerage due?
10

Auckland Arab,

20/02/2008 08:17:32
Dear oh dear. They just keep on digging. Brown is so detached from reality he probably doesn't think there is anything wrong with this. The public will decide and their verdict on Brown will be damning.
11

joppa jock,

Huntingdon 20/02/2008 09:08:34
The whole question of non-doms escaping paying taxes is enough to make you puke. Do Brown and Darling really believe that these mega-rich people will simply pack up and leave their multi-million poud homes in London for the sake of £20k.. That's not even the cost of a night out in the city for most of them. So much for New Labour, the party whose origins were to protect the working classes against the monied land owners. Now that most of the MP's in Labour have become the priviliged rich they have no interest in the lower classes.
12

Doh,

20/02/2008 10:26:42


I guess I still have a problem with the term
non domiciled resident - sounds like a contradication.

Anyway I love the fact that fat cats are now paid so much that there salary is quoted per month rather than per year as normal mortals.

Fill your boots, comrades.
13

Tris,

La La Land 20/02/2008 10:41:25

You couldn't make it up.

It's like so much else, totally legal, absolutely above board. Prudence and Sweetheart haven't done anything wrong here.

It's just like the Wintertons, renting their own house (that we bought for them) so we can carry on paying the rent for them, and they can avoid death duties on it.

All these things are legal in Labour's BRITAIN, and cost un billions. But the poor lad from the scheme that 'forgets' to own up to a day's labouring, and does the country out of £9.50 in benefit, is in deep doo dah though, and we put OAPs in prison for not being able to afford to pay all their Council Tax.

Prudence was right when he agreed with Bush that we shared the same princples.... decency, fairness... blah blah; we just don't put them into practice.

Lovely country.... proud as punch to live here. Well done Labour.
14

The Master,

20/02/2008 10:58:31
"Sir Ron Sandler is now presumably becoming the second best paid person in Newcastle after Michael Owen but at least Michael Owen pays his taxes here," Mr Cable told the Commons during a debate on Northern Rock.

Sorry to be pernickety, but he would have to earn £90,000 A WEEK to be second to Michael Owen. I was half asleep when I heard this on the radio this morning and found myself wondering how there was so much outrage if this was his yearly wage. Now I know that it’s his monthly, it seems about right to me. This works out at about £22,500 a week, which would be the wage of someone on the fringes of the Newcastle squad or a valued Old Firm player, if Cable insists on trying to be too clever with his footie comparisons.

The fact that he’s a non dom is neither here nor there, as far as I’m concerned. I can tell you for free that if I had such an income, the UK, I’d shelter my assets and exploit the 90 day rule to the full (just like Sir Ron, in point of fact!) Fair play to Sir Ron and enough of all the jealousy already!
15

Alternative (High Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 20/02/2008 11:00:32
So what?
16

The Master,

20/02/2008 11:05:51
Correction: it should have read “forget the UK” in the last paragraph of my post above. The Master is still half asleep: he’s rarely a morning poster for this very reason!
17

AJ Fife,

20/02/2008 11:30:59
He's getting about the same as redhot TV dame Natasha Kaplinsky, so he's no that guid!
18

Arnie,

Newington 20/02/2008 12:30:50
He does not even have experience of retail banking, his previous experience was in wholesale banking. The government are pinning a lot of trust and hope in this guy, i am not sure he will deliver.
19

Norma,

Edinburgh 20/02/2008 12:36:36
Where is the salary for this new boss coming from and why do we need to 'import' Mr Sandler, are there no home grown businessmen available?
20

Navvy,

20/02/2008 13:15:49
If he has lived and worked in UK for 20 years then he is resident and should pay tax

The IR or whatever its contracted out name is this week are great at chasing wee fry but useless at everything else

Darling, whose darling not mine and his predecessor was a conman
21

danielrober,

20/02/2008 13:57:20
I really wonder how many of the Bits emigrating, are emigrating, so they can stay in the UK to avoid tax. It's just a joke.

Good government plans and intentions are been ruinined by such open tax Ev"£$%^&*ion activities.
22

GP,

20/02/2008 14:03:45
You just gotta larf at this. More London cheats getting away without paying their share. They already take more out of society than they contribute but because of their greed thius is still not enough. Typical Londonites, take take take.
When will the rest of the UK wake up?
23

morris,

edinburgh 20/02/2008 14:09:04
Does this mean he cannot donate money to Wendy then? Oh well the deals off Sorry Herr Schandler. Next please.
24

Number 6,

Germany 20/02/2008 14:11:01
What a classic LABOUR shambles. Keep them coming Gordy,
you financial genius you.
25

morris,

edinburgh 20/02/2008 14:21:43
16

Not to mention threatening Incapacity Benefit claimants with the removal of this benefit.

Does this mean if you are looking for a job you will collect job seekers allowance.but if you become ill TOUGH !You are no longer seeking work so you dont get anything Conclusion : You die .

Every single recipient of incapacity benefit has undergone medical examination.If there are huge sways of false claimants then take it up with the people who examined them and examine them again,but removal of the benefit in its entirety, punishes people who are genuine claimants!
It would appear that the government wants to save expenditure irrespective of the consequences. even the Tories never went that far! Bar stewards, the entire Labour Party.
26

redshank,

usa 20/02/2008 14:24:41
Non doms should pay tax on all remittance and all UK income. Double their Council Tax. Which then benefits the area in which they live. A ban on the purchase of property [by don doms] in the lower 50% of the tax band. This would help people trying to get on the property ladder and the buy to let market. Cancel the 30,000 pound levy [$60,000]and replace it with a yearly work permit. This would be paid for by the company hiring a non dom employee. It would be very easy to implement
27

Fairfax,

20/02/2008 15:16:21
morris (28): "Every single recipient of incapacity benefit has undergone medical examination."

That's correct. However, a GP confronted by a patient who accurately describes the symptoms of depression has little option but to diagnose depression, implying the possibility of abuse. Consider, above all, that the number of incapacity claimants has roughly quadrupled since the late 1970s, currently reaching 2.6 million people, and costing $12.5 million pounds per year. All of this has occurred during a period of economic growth and improving health and living standards. Does this not provoke some scepticism concerning our incapacity benefit claimants?

28

Fairfax,

20/02/2008 15:24:18
GP (15): "They already take more out of society than they contribute but because of their greed thius is still not enough. Typical Londonites, take take take."

In what way are non-domiciled Londoners typical Londoners? In any case, why do you believe that non-domociled Londoners take more than they contribute?
29

Miss Jean Brodie,

20/02/2008 16:35:46
New Labour - No Honour !
30

Nikostratos,

20/02/2008 17:07:27
Guardian/ICM poll


Conservatives: 37% Labour: 34% Liberal Democrats: 21% others including the snp 9% UK voting intentions
31

Andrew Allan,

20/02/2008 17:38:22
#31.,Fairfax.
I'm sorry to break the bad news to you Fairfax, but to get incapacity benefit you must be examined by someone appointed by the department of works and not just your own GP.
32

Voldemort,

Edinburgh 20/02/2008 17:42:43
33 -- Yup, New Labour - plenty of honours ... for their buddys ....

How long do you think it will be before we have 'lord' Prescott poncing up and down the House in his Minks !? The Irony would almost be too much to bear but side splittingly funny!

Non-dom -- leave them alone, they are folk who are just smart enough not to pay Tax at the same rate as us dummies .... I also find it funny that the same folk who cry foul on executive salaries have no problem with a football player earning £100,000 a week ... heyho I guess thats just the way it is ...
33

Andrew Allan,

20/02/2008 17:56:20
#36., Voldemort.
Voldemort, the thought of Prescott in his minks maybe an awful vision to behold, but how can it be any worse than that old witch Attila the Hen(MT).
34

HEN BROON 5,

ALBA GU BRATH 20/02/2008 19:01:33
#32 FAIRFAX. Start here:
Brown's £2bn Tube bail out...THE SOUTH FEAST.......


The Government is having to pay £2billion to clear the debts of failed Tube contractor Metronet, it was revealed today.

The Department for Transport must hand over the money after Metronet's backers called in their loans. It marks a major humiliation for Gordon Brown who as Chancellor was the chief architect of the private public partnership deal behind the debacle.

Metronet had originally raised the cash to cover the cost of its contracts to maintain and upgrade seven London Underground lines. But it went into administration last year with the debt outstanding.

Conservative transport spokesman Stephen Hammond said: "This is an extraordinary sum of money. The contracts should have been more tightly written. We,the taxpayer, are now underwriting the cost of Gordon Brown's failed PPP."

Under the arrangement, pushed through by Mr Brown in the face of fierce opposition, Metronet's backers are entitled to have all their debts repaid exactly six months after the company went into administration.

The Government has been forced to pick up the bill on behalf of Transport for London which is seeking to take over Metronet. "Metronet raised this money and should have invested it effectively, it failed," said a TfL insider.

The complex financial arrangement sees the Government hand over £2 billion to TFL which will in turn pay the money to Metronet's lenders.

TfL said the failure would not cost the London farepayer any more money. But it was unclear exactly how much the taxpayer would be out of pocket.

Insiders said that until TfL got its hands on Metronet's books it was impossible to tell how much work they had done and at what cost.

London Underground managing director Tim O'Toole said: "Our priority remains the removal of Metronet from PPP administration as quickly as possible. A great deal of progress has already been made. Tube services continue to operate
35

HEN BROON 5,

20/02/2008 19:03:55


London Underground managing director Tim O'Toole said: "Our priority remains the removal of Metronet from PPP administration as quickly as possible. A great deal of progress has already been made. Tube services continue to operate safely and reliably for passengers, as they have done throughout the period of PPP administration."

Today's arrangement was triggered by the banks whichwere entitled to call in their debts - a process known as the Put option - from Metronet exactly six months after the company went into administration.

A Department of Transport aide said the deal was equivalent of someone having to pay off their mortgage early.

In a statement a spokesman said: "The settlement gives London Underground the resources needed to manage Metronet's administration and move toward a more stable long-term footing and continue the work to maintain, renew and upgrade the Underground.

"This will have limited net impact on public finances since Metronet's borrowing was already part of the Government's balance sheet."

Metronet, the largest of the two private firms upgrading the Tube, collapsed after running out of cash. Despite receiving around £70 million a month of government money to upgrade nine of the 12 Tube lines - all but the Jubilee, Northern and Piccadilly - it forecast a £2 billion black hole.

This put it in dispute with the Mayor, who frequently condemned the firm as incompetent and called for its directors to be "hung, drawn and quartered".

This condemnation, combined with delays in its work, caused its share price to crash. When it applied for an extra £550 million to keep it going but received only £121 million, the company was put into administration. Despite the collapse, TfL performed a miracle and kept services running - though many of the station upgrades have been put on ice.











36

HEN BROON 5,

20/02/2008 19:05:04
Add in Northern Rock to save The City and then:
Our collective pensions pay a lot of bonuses in the city of London. Scottish money is spent on educating a lot of people who go and live and pay tax in London. Bureacrats who administer Scotland work and play in London. Our soldiers go off and fight in Iraq and pay their taxes centrally. We shop in shops who report profits centrally. We buy things made by companies who report profits centrally.
We pay for media based in London..... When you dig down and add on the cash that is not included in the per capita amounts, you find that the SOUTH EAST U.K. is cushioned by billions of taxpayers money which pours into London from Scotland and the rest of the U.K.Scotland’s budget administers a geographic area covering one third of the UK landmass.The present figures per head are. N.I. £9385. Scotland. £8623. Wales. £8139. England. £7121.These figures only take account of identifiable spending. ie. Money collated to the London account is monies that are spent specifically for the benefit of London.The figures do not account for, thousands of Civil service jobs stuffed into London because it is “The Capital,” The Foreign Office-The MOD-Dept.of Health-Culture and Sport-The Treasury-The Home Office-MI5-MI6-and Westminster including The Lords, do not count towards the London per capita account as they are regarded as for the common good of the U.K. as a whole.
A massive public subsidy pouring into London that does not show up on the books. These agencies by their very existence create in their wake thousands of spin of industries businesses and job’s to service them. As Scotland is finding out. Professor James Mitchell of Strathclyde University say’s , there are billions spent on London that are never added to the account’s thousands and thousands of jobs centred in London simply because it is the capital of the U.K. These jobs are counted as part of the shared U.K. total, never added to the London spend.
It doesn’t matter
37

HEN BROON 5,

20/02/2008 19:05:36
It doesn’t matter if it part of the common U.K. effort, you can’t pretend that all the investment in London is doing any good in Aberdeen or Devon.The Millennium Dome, cost £789 million, almost twice as much as Holyrood, for what a white tent? Money plundered from the Lottery at the expense of the U.K..The Olympics are already at £5bn. And will plunder the Lottery again, starving Scottish athletes of funds for development, and with Scotland forced into a U.K. team many Scottish athletes will never see Olympic fame as they would otherwise in a Scottish team.The Jubilee rail link at £3.5bn. 3.5 times the estimate for a Forth crossing. Scotland’s entire transport “allowance,” is £2.3bn. The new Euro Star London to Paris line has just cost us the thick end of £6bn. Great benefit to us here in Scotland. London Cross Rail at £16bn. Has now been approved, and will according to the Unionist spinners be a benefit to the UK as a whole. Since it does not go near the rest of the UK we will have to wait for the spin on that one.
The BBCs budget is £4bn. Half of the Scottish “allowance,” for health. According to the BBCs annual report, 44,234 hours of TV were produced in London, compared to 2,495 in Scotland. They spent a tiny £106 million in Scotland out of a £505 million outside London. Leaving £3.5 billion INSIDE London, no wonder BBC Scotland is so utterly dire and pathetic.Institutions classed as “National Resources,” do not count towards London Government spending. The National Gallery gets £26 million. National History Museum gets £45 million. The British Museum gets £45 million. The National Museum of Scotland is classed as “just for Scotland,” and gets £15 million per annum. Most of the UKs citizens will never visit these “national assets,” in London, as it is to expensive to travel and stay there.

The London Centric Scotlandphobic Union is a giant con and propaganda machine. And then there is GERS which was compiled by Dr. Goudie was ordered by the Tory’s primarily
38

HEN BROON 5,

20/02/2008 19:06:30
The London Centric Scotlandphobic Union is a giant con and propaganda machine. And then there is GERS which was compiled by Dr. Goudie was ordered by the Tory’s primarily to undermine the truth put forward by the SNP and many financial experts that Scotland was economically viable as an independent country. Dr. Goudie has urged politicians to treat GERS with caution as the figures used are pure mythology and propaganda, and have easily been discredited by many experts and the SNP


The top secret McCrone report said:
It is not possible to compare these figures with an accurate estimate of Scotland’s present balance of payments position. From the state of Scotland’s economy one would expect a balance of payments deficit on current account and a rough comparison of income and expenditure estimates for GDP suggest that this could be of the order of £300m. a year in 1970/71. Plainly this is a most unreliable figure and it will vary from year to year, but it is probably sufficient to suggest the orders of magnitude. What is quite clear is that the balance of payments gain from North Sea oil would easily swamp the existing deficit whatever its size and transform Scotland into a country with a substantial and chronic surplus.

No wonder then that the Westminster/ UK/ English parliament, (same thing) lies and contorts itself so badly to keep Scotland where they want her. Who wants a partner who you have to subsidise? Scotland needs to be kept frightened to make a move without the permission of London.
39

HEN BROON 5,

20/02/2008 19:27:14
GERS (Government Expenditure and Revenues Statistics) leaves North Sea oil revenues OUT from the Scottish account, Oil companies corporation tax is credited to London.

And it puts the entire cost of Trident IN the Scottish account.

Creative accounting, what, what.
40

Nikostratos,

20/02/2008 19:33:35
#42 kn'b


There he goes in his black mac clutching his copy of the 'Top Secret' Oooer! Mcrone report having a sneaky look...getting all hot and bothered....tw't who cares
41

HEN BROON 5,

20/02/2008 20:07:27
#44.

The question was asked by Fairfax I gave him the answer.

Unless you have anything significant to say apart from calling schoolboy names such as knob and twa*, just toddle along and have a wee greet to nurse.

A great many people care which is why we have an SNP goverment and will shortly be declaring independence.

ALBA GU BRATH.
42

Tris,

20/02/2008 20:37:23
~44. Nikostratos

Any Scot should care. We could be living like Norwegians if we had had all that money and not had to pay out for all the disasterous policies of Mrs Thatcher, Mr Major, Mr Bliar and now Prudence Brown, running the world, buying nuclear deterents that we can't use unless the Americans give us permission, fighting illegal wars that are nothing to do with us.

We could have had roads, schools, hospitals, transport, youth centres, places for our old folk. We cold have had old age pensions that would have kept us alive. We could have had decent lives.

Maybe you dont care. Maybe you're one of the rich who does live like a Norwegian, I'm not. I would like to. Therefore I care.

Excellent information HenBroom. An interesting read.

43

Fairfax,

20/02/2008 20:42:47
Hen Broon 5: "#44. The question was asked by Fairfax I gave him the answer."

Not really. The crucial part, which you have omitted, is that the London metropolitan area generates some 30% of the UK trillion pound GDP (see, for instance, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London#Economy),
besides which North Sea Oil and, indeed, Scotland's GDP are rendered somewhat insignificant.

"GERS (Government Expenditure and Revenues Statistics) leaves North Sea oil revenues OUT from the Scottish account, Oil companies corporation tax is credited to London."

This is a rather tired point. Those companies registered in London are indeed credited to London. For similar reasons, RBS income is credited to Scotland, despite much of its business being in England.
Nevertheless, even if you combine oil income and oil panies' corporation tax in Scottish income, you will find it difficult to reach more than 40% of London's GDP.
44

Fairfax,

20/02/2008 20:47:28
Andrew Allan (35): "I'm sorry to break the bad news to you Fairfax, but to get incapacity benefit you must be examined by someone appointed by the department of works and not just your own GP."

What's your point? I made no claim that the GP's recommendation was sufficient, merely that a GP faced with an unscrupulous person feigning depression has little choice but to diagnose depression. As I pointed out in my original post, the number of incapacity benefits seekers has quadrupled since the late 1970s, consuming some £12.5 billion per annum. Can this increase really be explained by a sudden increase in true incapacity numbers, far greater than in similar European nations?
45

danielrober,

20/02/2008 22:01:24
# HEN BROON 5

Very interestig. I'm still on the fence over separation, as i can't see Scotland surviving in the EU as a smaller entity. We realy would be pushed back to the end of the que. Just look a the Firth of Forth Bridge to see what would happen to Scotlands costs.

As for the rest, well as an engineer i have to admit what my industry realy needs at the moment is some decent lawyers. Lawyers who will stand and fight. But it hardly ever happens. Its just like Braveheart, we turn up to fight, they negociate and while we are away we've been robed.

Howeverb I think this is a tax eva£$%n issue. People are emigrating, legally, but remaining in the UK to avoid tax. Its a real and growing problem.
46

HEN BROON 5,

20/02/2008 22:15:01
#47. The GDP you refer to is inflated because of the reasons given in the South Feast, you will not acknowledge that because you cannot rebut any of it as it is the truth. The books are fiddled to make London look what it is not. The rest of the UK subsidises London to the tune of billions hidden in the cooked books.

You try and dismiss the whole thing as a "tired point." It may be tired to you Fairfax who pops up to try and sneer and play with semantics to try and keep the propaganda spinning, but the pigeons are home and roosted old chap, so take your tired point and smoke it.

You mention GERS and the oil account but conveniently miis the Trident account, the whole thing is unionist smoke and mirrors.

It is the propaganda and spinning and lies pumped out by the unionist establishment that is tired, and the fanatics who pop up here to try and play the cracked records. Negative unionist scaremongering has added fuel to the SNPs cause and comments like yours are very helpful in that respect.

Your remarks about incapacity benefit are accurate at least. But politicians of all persuasions have used these incapacity records as a convenient pool to hide unemployment figures, encouraging GPs to sign people out of dole money into long term incapacity. But then Fairfax if you are a redundant coal miner, ship builder, car assembly worker, fisherman, perhaps you are depressed and unfit for work after seeing what lies ahead. Not every one can work in a call centre or an Asda check out, or indeed lecture on full time salary for part time hours.

Toodle pip old bean.


ALBA GU BRATH.
47

HEN BROON 5,

20/02/2008 22:28:59
49 danielrober,20/02/2008 22:01:24

I agree on the tax evasion issue. But I have to say if I was a billionaire, I would make every effort to pay as little tax as possible, so if the loop holes are there they will be exploited.

My take on it is back to 97 and Blair stealing the Tory's clothes. New Labour are just the old Tory party, it is the only way they could stay in power. As Thatcher said, her greatest achievement was New Labour. And then to confirm it all Broon the Goon invites the dragon to No. 10. A decision he will regret.

New Labour need to keep the city sweet, hence Northern Rock, and they need there rich billionaires in the Canaries and Channel Islands to get there funds laundered to them.

With regard to separation. I believe with all my heart that Scotland would be much more successful free of the constraints of London, it is a mill stone round our necks. The evidence is all around us, but some people still believe the unionist ghost stories and cling on to the security blanket of the UK.

There are very few nations on earth that do not have a fiscal deficit, we would be no different for a few years. If we make mistakes and we will, they will be ours, not London's, we will sink or swim by our own endeavours, and sink is not an option, we have to much going for us. It will put an end to the argument for ever, then we can focus all that energy on our own nation.

ALBA GU BRATH.
48

Tris,

20/02/2008 23:07:01
""As I pointed out in my original post, the number of incapacity benefits seekers has quadrupled since the late 1970s, consuming some £12.5 billion per annum. Can this increase really be explained by a sudden increase in true incapacity numbers, far greater than in similar European nations""

One of the reasons that number increased so much was the deliberate policy of persuading people onto the then Sickness Benefit (the figures for which were not announced monthy), from the then Unemployment Benefit (the figures for which were annopunced monthly and were becoming the most awful embarrassment to Thatcher).

One of the sad facts of modern life in Britain is that people are mighty depressed. I wonder why. A recent survey of Spaniards found that 60% of them were happy with their lot, and that the figure in Britain was 2%.

It isn't conclusive evidence of course, but it does point us in a direction. We are a depressed nation. You only have to walk down the streets to see the sad, drawn faces, the fact that half the population appears to need to get off their face on something at every avaiable opportunity and that some hideously large percentage of the population is obese.

Ok. The figures are bad, but the life of people in this country is bad. Let's not assume that all the people on the Incapacity Benefit are liars and cheats. That's what the Government is doing.

49

Nikostratos,

21/02/2008 00:09:11
#46 Tris

Bah..Humbug
50

Nikostratos,

21/02/2008 00:09:52
lets all be norwegian..then..eh..Bah Humbug
51

Nikostratos,

21/02/2008 00:15:21
#52 tris

I know someone who bit of his own leg to get onto incapacity benefits..........lives's the life of riley now he is not depressed one bit.......Although he does have a limp
52

Fairfax,

21/02/2008 08:08:10
Hen Broon 5 (50): "The GDP you refer to is inflated because of the reasons given in the South Feast, you will not acknowledge that because you cannot rebut any of it as it is the truth."

Please try to understand: the London area's GDP is roughly 30% of UK GDP. Even if every item you list as subsidy were excluded, it would only account for a small fraction of that, of the order of a few per cent.
53

Fairfax,

21/02/2008 08:28:21
Hen Broon 5 (42): "The top secret McCrone report said:"

But it said it in the late 1970s! Much has changed in 30 years: the post-war decline of socialism ended, at least temporarily, albeit without much help from Scottish voters or, indeed, Scottish politicians. Oil was extremely important to the UK in the late 1970s and early 1980s, but not after.

"Negative unionist scaremongering has added fuel to the SNPs cause and comments like yours are very helpful in that respect."

I'm not a unionist: I want Scotland to secede. One reason for that is that it would be (roughly) revenue-neutral for England: I see little point in a "surly lodger" who pays so little rent. Why are you arguing for the economic importance of Scotland to the UK?

"But then Fairfax if you are a redundant coal miner, ship builder, car assembly worker, fisherman, perhaps you are depressed and unfit for work after seeing what lies ahead."

If you believe that, then you cannot logically support my argument for cutting incapacity benefit. You also cannot support continued EU membership, since that it the root of the fishermen's problems.
54

Allan(handofgod137),

21/02/2008 15:20:18
CHANCELLOR Alistair Darling last night carried out his threat to pile up £100 billion of taxpayers' money and then set fire to it.




Londoners gathered around the blazing fortuneMr Darling has been steadily increasing the mound outside the Treasury since last September, as City analysts debated whether he would torch it or use it to buy Sir Richard Branson a new balloon.

But by 3pm yesterday his intentions were clear as a large truck arrived in Whitehall and tipped an absolutely enormous number of £50 notes onto the pile.

The chancellor then appeared carrying two large jerry cans filled with petrol.

After waving to a handful of tourists, he calmly began to drizzle the fuel onto the mountain of notes while whistling the tune from the latest Audi advert.

Mr Darling then produced a small Zippo cigarette lighter, flipped it open, lit it and casually tossed it onto the pile.

With another wave to the crowd he headed back inside as a large plume of pale grey smoke rose into the clear blue sky over central London.

Mr Darling reappeared 20 minutes later, this time accompanied by the prime minister, and the two men shook hands and posed for pictures in front of the spectacular, raging inferno.

A Treasury spokesman said last night: "It got to the point where the pile was so big that it would have been a shame not to set fire to it."

He added: "The chancellor enjoyed himself enormously and is now desperate to set fire to some houses."
55

Andrew Allan,

21/02/2008 18:38:59
#48.,Fairfax, 20/02/2008 20:47:28
‘What's your point? I made no claim that the GP's recommendation was sufficient, merely that a GP faced with an unscrupulous person feigning depression has little choice but to diagnose depression. As I pointed out in my original post, the number of incapacity benefits seekers has quadrupled since the late 1970s, consuming some £12.5 billion per annum. Can this increase really be explained by a sudden increase in true incapacity numbers, far greater than in similar European nations?’

It is more than possible that the numbers of those depressed could go up to such high number, just look at the job insecurity and the social changes happening within the UK between the 1970s right up until the present day. Just look at the number of suicides of young people in a small area of Wales. Who could have guessed? I will say this though, for such high numbers to occur those running services do have to neglect the people in those communities.

56

Fairfax,

21/02/2008 19:17:42
Andrew Allan (59): "It is more than possible that the numbers of those depressed could go up to such high number"

It's certainly possible, although I wonder, like Frank Field MP, whether we might simply be prolonging depression by incapacity benefit. However, there is another explanation: we're wasting the best part of £12.5 billion per year. I often read posters describing the cost of Trident as unaffordable, for example, when it's £100 billion over the next 40 years or so; we spend that every decade on incapacity benefit.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.