Excuses, Excuses, Excuses

[Emmson]

No sensible person believes Labour 1997 - 2010 was worse for business than Toryism 2010 - 2024.

[greenmark]

No sensible person believes Labour 1997 - 2010 was worse for business than Toryism 2010 - 2024.

Crikey that''s a big statement!!
My instinct is to agree but I don't have the figures except for GDP and progress of the FTSE 100 which is very poor (flatline while the Dow has wobbled but it has been relentlessly upwards). Which for a free market, entrepreneurial party is a damning indictment

[sionascaig]

No sensible person believes Labour 1997 - 2010 was worse for business than Toryism 2010 - 2024.

Crikey that''s a big statement!!
My instinct is to agree but I don't have the figures except for GDP and progress of the FTSE 100 which is very poor (flatline while the Dow has wobbled but it has been relentlessly upwards). Which for a free market, entrepreneurial party is a damning indictment

I think a quality of life / public services assessment would be needed to compare as after the crash (when the tories took over) the world became a different place in general - v low inflation & returns vs what went before..

I believe "austerity" was necessary, it was just the severity and where the cuts fell that were political choices and Osbourne has already said (with hindsight) he got it wrong.

==> How refreshing is that - a politician admitting they got something wrong - can't see the current crop doing that...

[greenmark]

No sensible person believes Labour 1997 - 2010 was worse for business than Toryism 2010 - 2024.

Crikey that''s a big statement!!
My instinct is to agree but I don't have the figures except for GDP and progress of the FTSE 100 which is very poor (flatline while the Dow has wobbled but it has been relentlessly upwards). Which for a free market, entrepreneurial party is a damning indictment

I think a quality of life / public services assessment would be needed to compare as after the crash (when the tories took over) the world became a different place in general - v low inflation & returns vs what went before..

I believe "austerity" was necessary, it was just the severity and where the cuts fell that were political choices and Osbourne has already said (with hindsight) he got it wrong.

==> How refreshing is that - a politician admitting they got something wrong - can't see the current crop doing that...

"political choices" is the crux isn't it? Free market or regulating the market.
The lie that private ownership of essential services offers better value has been exposed.
Sadly govt ownership ain't that great either. We now have a mish-mash of private suppliers and govt wading in when the private suppliers screw up.
I don't envy Labour trying to correct things to the extent that they can get elected in 5 years.

[Derek27]

After 14 years of lying through their teeth, Kemi Badenoch says it's time to tell the truth. Who'd have thought of that?!!

[Archery1969]

Sky News:

The government has opted not to intervene in proposals to close and redevelop part of Chatham Docks in Kent, a scheme which one of the world's largest steel companies had previously warned could lead to one of its divisions abandoning the UK.

ArcelorMittal has further warned that the Docks' closure could have "seismic adverse consequences for the British economy and multiple strategic industries".

Nice one plastic tits Rayner.

[greenmark]

After 14 years of lying through their teeth, Kemi Badenoch says it's time to tell the truth. Who'd have thought of that?!!

That's a lie in itself. She won't be the next PM or Tory leader at the next GE. Save this post and stick it in my face when I'm proved wrong.

EDIT: watching her on Kuenssberg - she is a car crash. Body language and language is evasive. The thought she could run the country is beyond the pantomime of BJ and Truss. The Tories do now need to worry about Reform.

[firlandsfarm]

No sensible person believes Labour 1997 - 2010 was worse for business than Toryism 2010 - 2024.

And no sensible person believes Labour 1997 - 2010 was better for business than Conservatism 2010 - 2024. So a stalemate then!

[firlandsfarm]

After 14 years of lying through their teeth, Kemi Badenoch says it's time to tell the truth. Who'd have thought of that?!!

Why just 14 years ... surely politicians have been lying for far longer than that! And let's face it the current mob have chalked up a pretty good 'lying' score in just this current calendar year which is all coming home to roost on their already tattered reputation.

[greenmark]

After 14 years of lying through their teeth, Kemi Badenoch says it's time to tell the truth. Who'd have thought of that?!!

Why just 14 years ... surely politicians have been lying for far longer than that! And let's face it the current mob have chalked up a pretty good 'lying' score in just this current calendar year which is all coming home to roost on their already tattered reputation.

It seems I was wrong about farm IHT. It looks like inheritors of working farms are going to be hit by a disproportianate bill.
It doesn't matter what value the farm is as an asset it's about the profit per year of the going concern. I think most farmers will be fuming right now that passing on their life's work to their kids will attract 20% over the allowance. £1 million is peanuts for a farm so if your kids want to continue farming they are going to be hit.
It's not right. Tax them if they sell up, but don't while they're farming.

[sionascaig]

It seems I was wrong about farm IHT. It looks like inheritors of working farms are going to be hit by a disproportianate bill.
It doesn't matter what value the farm is as an asset it's about the profit per year of the going concern. I think most farmers will be fuming right now that passing on their life's work to their kids will attract 20% over the allowance. £1 million is peanuts for a farm so if your kids want to continue farming they are going to be hit.
It's not right. Tax them if they sell up, but don't while they're farming.

My understanding is there an allowance of £1m husband, £1m wife plus £500k each personal allowance which equates to £3m and for the farm bit of inheritance tax, that can be paid over 10yrs if business remains a going concern if passed on.

Even if right, still not great but better than the headlines...

PS; J Clarkson is on record as saying the main reason for buying his farm was to avoid inheritance tax... That said he has certainly invested a lot in it, the local community and generated a considerable amount of economic activity so fair play to him..

[firlandsfarm]

It seems I was wrong about farm IHT. It looks like inheritors of working farms are going to be hit by a disproportianate bill.
It doesn't matter what value the farm is as an asset it's about the profit per year of the going concern. I think most farmers will be fuming right now that passing on their life's work to their kids will attract 20% over the allowance. £1 million is peanuts for a farm so if your kids want to continue farming they are going to be hit.
It's not right. Tax them if they sell up, but don't while they're farming.

My understanding is there an allowance of £1m husband, £1m wife plus £500k each personal allowance which equates to £3m and for the farm bit of inheritance tax, that can be paid over 10yrs if business remains a going concern if passed on.

Even if right, still not great but better than the headlines...

PS; J Clarkson is on record as saying the main reason for buying his farm was to avoid inheritance tax... That said he has certainly invested a lot in it, the local community and generated a considerable amount of economic activity so fair play to him..

The discrepancy arises because farming is very capital hungry. A £3m farm (and don't forget all the capital invested in the machinery etc. in addition) may only produce £30k of income to the farmer. How many other businesses run at a <1% profit on capital while being at the mercy of the supermarkets?

[greenmark]

It seems I was wrong about farm IHT. It looks like inheritors of working farms are going to be hit by a disproportianate bill.
It doesn't matter what value the farm is as an asset it's about the profit per year of the going concern. I think most farmers will be fuming right now that passing on their life's work to their kids will attract 20% over the allowance. £1 million is peanuts for a farm so if your kids want to continue farming they are going to be hit.
It's not right. Tax them if they sell up, but don't while they're farming.

My understanding is there an allowance of £1m husband, £1m wife plus £500k each personal allowance which equates to £3m and for the farm bit of inheritance tax, that can be paid over 10yrs if business remains a going concern if passed on.

Even if right, still not great but better than the headlines...

PS; J Clarkson is on record as saying the main reason for buying his farm was to avoid inheritance tax... That said he has certainly invested a lot in it, the local community and generated a considerable amount of economic activity so fair play to him..

The discrepancy arises because farming is very capital hungry. A £3m farm (and don't forget all the capital invested in the machinery etc. in addition) may only produce £30k of income to the farmer. How many other businesses run at a <1% profit on capital while being at the mercy of the supermarkets?

That my position at this poiint. For inheritors that genuinely want to contine the family busness it seems like a kick in the face. How tax people assess whether inheritors are running the farm as a gong concern I don't know but the principle of taxing in this broadbrush way seems very unfair to me.
As a Labour lening supporter I'm not very happy with it at all and still unconvinced by their answers post-budget about it.

[Archery1969]

NFU president Tom Bradshaw said: “It’s been a disastrous budget for family farmers, and especially tenant farmers. When you look farmers in the eye and make them a promise, keep it. The shameless breaking of clear promises on Agricultural Property Relief will snatch away the next generation’s ability to carry on producing British food, plan for the future and shepherd the environment.”

“It’s clear the government does not understand that family farms are not only small farms, and that just because a farm is a valuable asset it doesn’t mean those who work it are wealthy. Let’s not sugar-coat this, every penny the Chancellor saves from this will come directly from the next generation having to break-up their family farm.”

“This is one of a number of measures in the Budget which make it harder for farmers to stay in business and significantly increase the cost of producing food.”

[Archery1969]

Governments seem to have very short memories.

Remember Covid:

1. One reason why the UK couldn’t fully close its borders like New Zealand did was because of the amounts of food imported. Experts during and after said the UK needed to produce more food itself and that reliefs and incentives should be retained and/or increased. Not decreased.

2. All medical experts agree, it’s not if but when a new pandemic hits again.

3. While not all experts agree, some believed if the pandemic restrictions had gone on for much longer then some forms of food rationing would have been introduced, similar to those implemented during WW2.

For those reasons above, Labours decision to do anything which may further restrict food production, is just bonkers.